r" 


GIFT  OF 
Leslie  Van  Ness  Denman 


as 


? 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

Microsoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/democracyafterwaOOhobsrich 


DEMOCRACY  AFTER   THE   WAR 


BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR 

TOWARDS    INTERNATIONAL  GOVERNMENT 

WORK  AND  WEALTH  :  A  Human  Valuation 

GOLD   WAGES  AND   PRICES 

THE   SCIENCE   OF  WEALTH 

THE  INDUSTRIAL  SYSTEM  :  An  Enquiry  into 
Earned  and  Unearned  Income 

THE  EVOLUTION  OF  MODERN  CAPITALISM 

IMPERIALISM 

JOHN   RUSKIN  :  SOCIAL  REFORMER 

THE   PROBLEM   OF  THE   UNEMPLOYED 

PROBLEMS   OF  POVERTY 


DEMOCRACY    AFTER 
THE  WAR 


BY 

J.    A.    HOBSON 


NEW   YORK 
THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 


; 


<ni) 


tyui^sp'/^ 


•3lFT  *0'P: 


^ci^i: 


(4//  ri^A/s  reservtd) 


PREFACE 

The  cause  of  democracy  has  suffered  almost  as  much 
from  its  friends  as  from  its  enemies.  For  while  the 
latter  have  held  it  to  be  either  undesirable  or  un- 
attainable, the  former  have  represented  it  either  as 
achieved  already  or  as  inevitable.  Now,  neither  of 
these  former  representations  is  true.  Effective  democ- 
racy nowhere  exists  either  in  the  politics  or  industry 
of  any  nation.  The  forms  of  political  self-government, 
indeed,  exist  in  Britain,  France,  America  and  else- 
where with  varying  measures  of  completeness.  But 
nowhere  does  the  will  of  the  people  play  freely  through 
these  forms.  In  every  country  the  will  of  certain 
powerful  men  or  interests  is  pumped  down  from  above 
into  the  party  machinery  that  it  may  come  up  with 
the  formal  register  of  an  electorate  denied  the  know- 
ledge and  opportunity  to  create  and  exercise  a  will 
that  is  informed  and  free.  Popular  opinion  and 
aspirations  act  at  best  as  exceedingly  imperfect 
checks  on  these  abuses  of  political  self-government. 
So  evident  has  been  the  failure  of  all  democratic 
forms  hitherto  devised  that  hostile  critics  have  pro- 
nounced democracy  incapable  of  realization.  "  The 
people  is  that  part  of  a  State  which  does  not 
know  what  it  really  wants  "  is  the  pronouncement 
of  a  famous  political  philosopher  in  Germany,  and  it 
expresses    the  judgment  of  many  in  this   country 


6  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

It  contains  a  powerful  element  of  truth.  Democracy, 
alike  in  politics  and  industry,  has  here,  as  elsewhere, 
been  impossible  because  the  people  have  not  got  a 
clear  understanding  of  what  they  want.  It  has, 
indeed,  been  a  chief  business  of  their  enemies  to 
prevent  them  from  gathering  this  fruit  from  the  tree 
of  knowledge 

And  the  lazy  assumption  of  many  so-called  demo- 
crats that  democracy  needs  no  striving  for,  because 
it  is  inevitable,  has  played  into  the  hands  of  despotism 
and  oligarchy.  They  have  been  content  to  float  along 
a  rising  tide.  With  Macbeth  they  have  proclaimed, 
"  If  Chance  will  have  me  king,  why,  Chance  may 
crown  me."  But  there  is  no  such  tide  of  chance  or 
destiny  working  without  the  conscious  will  and  effort 
of  men.  Nor  does  it  suffice  to  substitute  for  destiny 
a  general  enthusiasm  of  popular  emotions  or  revolu- 
tionary aspirations.  Such  energy  is  impotent  with- 
out rational  direction.  Real  democracy  cannot  be 
achieved  unless  a  sufficient  amount  of  intelligent 
co-operation  based  upon  clear  purpose  is  available. 

Now,  the  first  requisite  to  this  clearing  of  purpose 
and  this  intelligent  co-operation  is  a  survey  of  the 
ground  and  forces  of  the  enemy.  For  the  people 
can  only  gain  mastery  by  defeating  and  ejecting  those 
who  hold  it  now.  The  war  has  here  done  good  service 
by  fighting  up  the  country  and  bringing  out  in  clear 
relief  the  full  alliance  of  reactionary  forces  with 
which  democracy  is  called  upon  to  deal.  Militarism 
stands  out  so  conspicuously  in  this  alliance  that  it 
seems  best  to  take  it  for  a  starting-point  in  our 
survey  and  then  to  consider  the  political,  economic 
and  social  supports  which  gather  round  it. 


PREFACE  7 

Examining  the  bonds  of  sympathy  and  interest 
which  unite  the  reactionary  forces,  we  find  them 
centred  in  the  arbitrary  "  will  to  power." 

Although  the  M  will  to  power  "  has  other  indepen- 
dent sources,  its  chief  instrument  and  embodiment  in 
modern  society  is  the  capitalist  structure  of  industry 
and  the  abuses  of  property  that  spring  therefrom. 
I  am  compelled  to  accept  as  substantially  correct 
the  general  socialist  analysis,  presenting,  as  the  main 
cause  of  what  is  wrong  in  politics  and  industry,  the 
direction  of  human  industry  by  capitalists  in  the  pur- 
suit of  private  profit.  But  equally  I  am  convinced 
that  the  socialist  analysis  is  damaged  for  rational  per- 
suasion by  an  excessive  simplification  of  the  problem 
and  in  particular  by  ignoring  or  disparaging  the  im- 
portance of  non-economic  factors.  I  have,  therefore, 
endeavoured  by  investigation  of  various  phases  of 
the  reactionary  movement  to  discover  and  exhibit 
the  nature  of  the  unconscious  interplay  between  the 
different  sorts  of  reactionary  agents  in  the  fields  of 
politics,  industry,  education  and  social  life.  The 
general  result  is  to  show  that,  if  democracy  is  to 
recover  its  losses  and  to  advance  after  the  war,  it 
must  confront,  not  only  with  enthusiasm  but  with 
considered  policy,  the  formidable  array  of  reaction- 
aries, realizing  that  the  causes  of  peace,  democracy 
and  internationalism  are  one  and  indivisible,  and  that 
with  the  triumph  of  this  confederacy  the  cause  of 
personal  liberty,  political  and  industrial  as  well  as 
spiritual,  is  indissolubly  bound. 


CONTENTS 


PREFACE 


PART  I 
THE  ENEMIES  OF   DEMOCRACY 

CHAPTER 

I.      MILITARISM  AND  THE  WILL  TO   POWER        .  .      13 

II.      MILITARISM    AND  CAPITALISM             .                .  -35 

III.  THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY        .                .  .52 

IV.  PROTECTIONISM   AND   IMPERIALISM                   .  .      68 
V.      POLITICAL  AND   INTELLECTUAL  REACTIONISTS  .102 

VI.      SPIRITUAL  AND    SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS           .  .    123 

PART  II 

THE  DEFENCE  OF  DEMOCRACY 

I.      HOW  TO   BREAK  THE  VICIOUS   CIRCLE           .  .    I45 

II.      THE   NEW   ECONOMIC  SITUATION        .                .  .    162 

III.  TWO   PROBLEMS   FOR  LABOUR            .                .  .    171 

IV.  THE   CONQUEST  OF  THE   STATE         .                .  .    180 
V.      THE   CLOSE    STATE    VERSUS  INTERNATIONALISM  .    192 

INDEX  ......   213 


PART    I 
THE    ENEMIES    OF    DEMOCRACY 


j  ->        j  •  •    •      a 


CHAPTER   I 
MILITARISM    AND    THE    WILL    TO    POWER 

The  antagonism  between  war  and  the  exercise  of 
those  personal  and  political  liberties  comprised  in 
democracy  is  indisputable.  For  though  it  may  be 
true  that  in  "  a  war  for  freedom  "  the  fighting  spirit 
of  the  nation  may  better  be  sustained  by  appeals 
to  the  voluntary  efforts  and  sacrifices  of  its  members, 
history  has  always  shown  that  this  faith  cannot 
live  in  the  atmosphere  of  war.  The  temper  of  war 
is  arbitrary  and  absolute  in  its  demands  not  only 
upon  its  fighting  units  but  upon  the  civil  populations, 
which  it  regards  as  mere  instruments  of  military 
power.  Modern  warfare,  in  which  nations  contend 
with  all  their  resources,  industrial  and  financial 
as  well  as  military,  has  gone  far  towards  erasing 
the  differences  once  recognized  between  combatants 
and  non-combatants.  The  levee  en  masse,  or  com- 
mandeering of  the  entire  adult  population,  is  the 
formal  register  of  the  reaction  of  war  on  liberty. 
In  war,  not  only  does  the  State  become  absolute  in 
its  relations  towards  the  individual,  but  militarism 
becomes  absolute  within  the  State.  This  truth 
is  attested  in  Great  Britain  by  the  virtually  un- 
limited powers  over  the  citizen  vested  by  the  Defence 

ot    the    Realm    Act    in    u  the    competent    military 

13 


14  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

authority,"  and  by  the  novel  powers  exercised  by 
Orders  in  Council  for  the  application  of  that  and 
/ptlieriernergency  Acts. 

A  brief  recital  of  the  various  invasions  upon  ordinary 
liberties  will  suffice.  This  legislation,  supplemented 
by  arbitrary  police  administration  and  mob  violence 
has  made  heavy  inroads  upon  our  ordinary  liberties 
of  speech,  meeting  and  Press,  of  travel,  trade,  occupa- 
tion and  investment.  The  State  restricts  and  regu- 
lates our  use  of  food  and  drink,  lets  down  our  services 
of  public  health  and  education,  remits  the  wholesome 
safeguards  of  our  Factory  Acts,  and  removes  the  con- 
stitutional guarantees  of  civil  liberty.  Military  and 
civil  authorities  may,  and  do,  arrest,  deport  and  im- 
prison men  and  women  without  formulating  charges 
or  bringing  them  to  trial.  The  security  of  Habeas 
Corpus  and  of  trial  by  jury  in  an  open  court,  in 
accordance  with  the  rules  of  law,  has  been  abrogated 
for  whole  classes  of  alleged  offenders,  and  in  many 
instances  the  onus  of  proving  innocence  has  been 
thrown  on  the  arrested  person.  Domiciliary  visits 
of  the  police,  the  opening  of  private  correspondence, 
and  the  use  of  agents  provocateurs  have  passed  from 
Russia  into  Britain.  The  principle  and  practice  of 
voluntary  military  service,  hitherto  distinguishing 
our  free  army  from  the  forced  armies  of  the  Continent, 
have  been  abolished  and  the  press-gang  system 
fastened  on  all  male  citizens  of  military  age.  The 
limited  powers  of  industrial  compulsion  contained 
within  the  Munitions  and  Military  Service  Acts  are 
liable  at  any  time  to  be  extended  into  a  full  measure 
of  industrial  conscription.  These  and  other  invasions 
of  personal  liberty  have  been  made  under  Acts  of 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       15 

Parliament  or  powers  of  the  Executive,  novel,  ill- 
defined  and  arbitrary,  and  by  methods  of  procedure 
contravening  the  established  practices  of  English 
law  and  constitution.  Under  an  agreed  suspension 
of  that  party  system  by  which  consideration  and 
discussion  of  important  new  proposals  were  secured 
in  Parliament,  these  revolutionary  Acts  were  imposed 
upon  the  House  with  no  opportunity  of  serious 
debate  and  with  no  adequate  communication  to  the 
people's  representatives  of  the  facts  and  reasons 
necessary  to  enable  them  to  form  and  register  a 
considered  judgment.  Not  only  the  spirit  but  the 
very  forms  of  popular  self-government  have  suffered 
violation.  For  the  House  of  Commons,  refusing  to 
take  orders  from  the  electorate  when  its  legal  time 
is  up,  has  repeatedly  extended  its  period  of  office  and 
of  pay  by  an  arbitrary  exercise  of  its  own  will.  Indeed, 
as  the  war  has  proceeded,  all  pretence  of  government, 
either  by  Parliament  or  by  the  Coalition  Cabinet, 
was  dropped,  and  a  self-appointed  triumvirate, 
speaking  through  a  novel  instrument,  a  War  Cabinet, 
has  usurped  all  the  real  powers  of  Government. 
Finally,  this  autocracy  has  secured  itself  by  utilizing 
the  Defence  of  the  Realm  Act  and  other  special 
powers  of  police  to  stop  free  discussion  of  the  merits 
of  their  acts  of  policy  or  constitutional  endeavours 
to  procure  their  repeal. 

How  far  these  invasions  of  civil  and  political  liberty 
were  necessary  or  useful  for  the  fighting  of  the  war, 
and  how  far  they  were  met  by  the  willing  surrender 
of  the  people,  are  questions  to  which  no  satisfactory 
answers  are  available.  A  fairly  general  acquiescence 
in  these  losses  of  liberty  "  for  the  duration  of  the  war  " 


16  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

may,  however,  be  assumed.  This  easy  acquiescence 
alike  of  the  people,  their  parliamentary  representatives 
and  the  public  Press  in  measures  of  such  grave  im- 
port imposed  upon  them  by  governmental  authority 
without  the  opportunity  of  forming  or  expressing  a 
reasonable  judgment,  is,  indeed,  an  important  factor 
in  the  inquiry  which  lies  before  us.  That  inquiry 
takes  its  first  shape  in  a  scrutiny  of  the  hypnotizing 
phrase  "  for  the  duration  of  the  war."  Many  sup- 
porters of  "  a  war  for  freedom  "  assume  that  when 
the  war  is  over,  the  steel  trap  will  automatically  open, 
and  the  caged  peoples  will  emerge  with  all  their 
ancient  liberties  intact  and  with  new  powers  and 
aspirations  towards  democracy.  Is  this  assumption 
warranted  ?  Those  who  make  it  commit  the  grave 
error  of  detaching  the  war  from  its  antecedents.  The 
trap  which  closed  so  tightly  round  the  European 
nations  in  1914,  and  which  since  has  caught  the  one 
great  pacific  Power  of  the  modern  world,  America, 
was  not  war.  It  was  militarism.  War  is  a  great 
dramatic  episode  in  the  career  of  militarism.  In  a 
£ense,  no  doubt,  militarism  leads  up  to,  produces,  and 
finds  its  meaning  or  full  expression  in  war.  But  in 
I  another  sense,  equally  true,  war  generates  militarism, 
/  and  finds  its  deeper  meaning  in  that  act.  It  is  the 
reciprocal  relation  that  exists  between  plant  and 
i  flower.  Regarded  from  the  common  aesthetic  stand- 
point, the  plant  lives  and  grows  to  produce  the  flower. 
But  regarded  from  the  more  disinterested  standpoint 
of  the  naturalist,  the  flower  exists  to  supply  the  seeds 
for  the  continuity  of  the  plant  life.  War  is  the  red 
flowering  of  militarism,  and  it  leaves  behind  it  the 
seeds  of  more  militarism.     This  is  the  natural  law  of 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       17 

human  history,  of  which  the  theory  of  "  a  war  to  end 
war"  appears  to  be  a  wild  defiance. 

I  do  not,  however,  seek  to  press  a  metaphor  so  far 
as  to  deny  the  possibility  of  breaking  a  natural  chain 
of  causation.  It  is  the  business  of  reason  and  of 
human  will,  themselves  parts  of  nature,  to  break 
such  chains.  But  it  is  right  to  begin  our  considera- 
tion of  the  chances  of  this  higher  intervention  by  a 
plain  recognition  of  the  difficulties,  which  are  not 
merely  "  metaphorical,' '  but  deeply  embedded  in  that 
course  of  human  events  to  which  a  war  belongs. 
Whether  a  war  ends  in  a  complete  victory,  followed  by 
a  "  dictated  "  peace,  or  in  some  less  complete  decision 
followed  by  a  negotiated  peace,  either  method  is 
likely  to  leave  seeds  of  future  strife,  because  the  terms 
it  embodies  are  not  in  themselves  conformable  to  the 
sense  of  justice  or  the  reasonable  will  of  the  parties 
concerned,  but  are  a  mere  register  of  the  preponder- 
ance of  power  when  the  conflict  is  brought  to  a  close. 
Even  if  the  terms  of  settlement  were  in  substance 
equitable,  a  supposition  in  itself  unreasonable,  the 
knowledge  that  they  were  a  register  of  force  and  not 
of  reasonable  assent  would  leave  a  dangerous  legacy  of 
discontent  with  each  disagreeable  item  of  the  generally 
equitable  compromise.  Thus,  in  any  case  the  pre- 
supposition remains  that  war  maintains  and  nourishes 
militarism.  Only  the  effectual  substitution  of  a  mode 
of  settling  grievances  conformably  with  reason  and 
justice  can  break  the  vicious  chain  of  mutual  causation 
by  which  war  and  militarism  support  one  another. 

The  consideration  of  the  possibility  of  such  a  sub- 
stitution is  properly  deferred  until  the  nature  of  the 
task  which  it  essays  has  been  fully  explored.     For 


18         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

this  purpose  I  have  thrust  into  the  forefront  of  the 
inquiry  the  first  plain  historic  fact,  that  war  normally 
leaves  behind  it  an  invigorated  militarism  It  is 
with  this  militarism  of  peace-time  that  the  people 
of  this  country,  as  of  every  other,  will  have  to  reckon 
when  the^war  is  over.  In  every  nation  a  militarist 
bureaucracy  will  be  in  actual  possession  of  the  seats 
of  government.  The  constitutional  rights  of  self- 
government  will  be  in  suspense  ;  emergency  legis- 
lation, conferring  despotic  power  upon  non-elected 
and  uncontrolled  Ministers  and  permanent  officials, 
will  still  remain  upon  the  Statute  Book  ;  the  ordinary 
usages  of  justice  will  be  overridden  ;  the  State  will  be 
in  control  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  chief  industries 
and  will  have  inured  the  public  to  habits  of  submis- 
sion and  obedience  to  its  absolute  authority.  Though 
much  of  this  war  regulation  may  be  remitted,  the 
lengthy  and  perilous  processes  of  demobilization  and 
of  re-adaptation  of  disturbed  industries  to  peace 
conditions,  complicated  by  the  insecurity  of  the  con- 
tinental situation,  will  probably  enable  our  Govern- 
ment to  defend  successfully  the  retention  of  large 
emergency  powers  for  a  considerable  period  after  the 
war  is  over.  Many  of  the  regulations  and  restraints 
imposed  during  the  war  will  afterwards  be  retained 
in  the  cause  of  national  defence  or,  more  broadly, 
of  public  welfare.  The  passage  from  war  to  peace 
will  be  a  passage  from  a  more  intense  to  a  less  intense 
militarism.  But  the  definitely  military  character 
of  the  State  will  remain  stamped  upon  all  the  leading 
functions  of  Government,  as  the  country  emerges 
from  war.  Industry,  commerce,  finance,  agriculture, 
education  and  most  other  normal  activities  will  remain 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       19 

"  militarized  "  in  the  sense  that  they  will  be  under 
the  conscious  and  organized  direction  of  "  national 
defence."  Nor  is  there  any  reason  to  suppose  that, 
after  some  brief  period  of  settlement  has  passed, 
during  which  such  of  the  fighting  forces  as  can  be 
disbanded  have  been  safely  redistributed  in  industry 
and  civil  life,  this  military  bureaucratic  rule  will 
simply  pass  away,  and  all  the  pre-war  liberties  of 
person,  travel,  trade,  justice  and  self-government  will 
be  restored.  No  thoughtful  person  can  think  this 
likely.  For  this  war  has  been  to  every  seeing  eye  in 
every  country  a  revelation  of  the  forces  of  reaction 
which  cannot  be  ignored.  For  the  first  time  defenders 
of  democracy  are  compelled  to  recognize  the  formid- 
able nature  of  their  task.  For  they  catch  a  glimpse  of 
the  confederacy  of  anti-democratic  forces  of  which 
militarism  is  the  physical  instrument. 

If  democracy  is  to  have  any  real  chance  of  survival, 
it  must  comprehend,  not  only  the  strength  of  this 
confederacy,  but  the  subtle  and  various  bonds  of 
interest  which  sustain  it.  We  had  best  begin  this 
inquiry  with  militarism  itself,  as  an  operative  institu- 
tion. Militarism  is  the  organiza^pr^of^^y^cal L  for  eg 
by  the  State,  so  as  to  be  able  to  compel  the  members 
of  another  State,  or  some  members  of  the  military 
State  itself,  to  act  against  their  will.  This  provisional 
definition  covers  the  two  uses  of  "  the  military," 
against  a  foreign  country  and  for  "  police  work  " 
at  home.  Militarism  is  not,  indeed,  normally  engaged 
in  either  of  these  processes,  but  in  preparations  for 
performing  them  in  case  of  need.  It  thus  stands 
as  the  surviving  incarnation  of  pure  physical  force  in 
a  civilization  the  value  and  progress  of  which  consist 


20  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

in  the  supersession  of  physical  by  intellectual  and 
moral  direction.  The  fact  that  it  has  harnessed  to 
its  chariot  some  of  the  finest  activities  of  the  human 
intellect  and  will  cannot  hide  the  truth  that  it  stands 
for  barbarism.  It  is  not  the  business  of  militarism 
to  regard  the  rights  or  wrongs  of  the  cause  in 
which  it  may  be  employed.  Neither  in  its  career 
of  preparation  nor  in  its  actual  operation  is  it 
concerned  "  to  reason  why."  Though,  like  other 
living  instruments,  it  may  come,  as  we  shall  see,  to 
develop  some  sort  of  will  of  its  own,  it  ordinarily 
takes  and  executes  the  orders  of  others.  Who  these 
others  are,  and  what  the  orders  that  they  give,  we 
shall  consider  presently.  But  at  the  outset  we  see  in 
militarism  a  simple  manifestation  of  the  State  as 
physical  power.  The  question  "  Power  to  do  what  ?  " 
does  not  yet  arise.  The  candid  admission  of  this  fact 
in  the  conventional  political  use  of  the  term  Power 
is  significant.  Peoples  and  their  Governments  in 
their  relations  with  one  another  rank  as  "  Powers." 
If  they  make  a  treaty  they  are  "  Signatory  Powers." 
If  they  join  to  impose  their  will  upon  some  weaker 
State  they  are  "  a  concert  of  the  Powers."  Their 
collective  attitude  may  be  generalized  as  "  a  balance 
of  power."  When,  as  recently  Japan,  they  exhibit 
a  sufficient  amount  of  military  and  naval  strength, 
they  become  "  Great  Powers."  The  fact  that  peoples 
are  related  to  one  another  in  the  world  not  as  groups 
of  human  beings,  with  the  common  quality  and 
interests  of  humanity,  but  as  Powers,  is  the  stark 
negation  of  all  morality  in  international  relations. 
Germany  has  chiefly  theorized  and  glorified  this 
attitude  :    but  every  State  has  lived  by  it. 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       21 


States,  thus  valuing  themselves  and  one  another  in 
terms  of  physical  power,  become  the  victims  of  the 
"  will  to  power/'  The  possession  and  exercise  of 
power  for  its  own  sake  have  often  been  charged  as  the 
besetting  sin  of  statesmen.  Derived  from  the  actual 
relation  of  States  to  other  States,  it  strikes  back  into 
the  vitals  of  domestic  statecraft.  Hence  a  similar 
lust  of  power  for  its  own  sake  comes  to  characterize 
the  bureaucrat,  who  wins  a  separate  satisfaction  by 
the  conscious  forcing  of  his  will  to  prevail  over  the 
wills  of  civilians.  A  half  recognition  of  the  fact 
that  his  official  power  ultimately  rests  upon  the  power 
of  physical  coercion  through  the  police  or  soldiery 
weaves  a  subtle  bond  of  sympathy  between  militarism 
and  bureaucracy.  Military  force  is  always  half 
realized  by  the  operative  statesman  and  official  as 
standing  behind  him  at  his  service.  Though  reason, 
justice,  influence  and  the  arts  of  persuasion  may 
be  the  ordinary  staple  of  statecraft,  the  consciousness 
of  a  power  to  make  his  will  prevail  is  always 
present  as  a  base  alloy. 

This  does  not  mean  that  soldiers,  or  statesmen,  or 
bureaucrats  are  in  their  nature  worse  than  other  men, 
but  that  their  position  exposes  them  more  to  the 
supreme  temptation.  The  supreme  temptation  is 
varicusly  described  as  self-assertion,  ambition,  ego- 
ism, or  individualism,  which  means  the  desire  to 
enjoy  the  pleasure  of  seeing  your  will  dominate  by 
sheer  force  the  wills  of  other  people.  The  auto- 
crat, the  tyrant,  the  bully  are  the  simplest  personal 
examples  of  this  last.  But  our  inquiry  finds  it  inspir- 
ing whole  classes  or  social  institutions,  often  disguised 
for   those   whom   it    affects    by  subtle  blends  and 


22  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

subterfuges.  The  civil  servant,  in  his  province  of 
administrator,  finds  something  congenial  in  the 
arbitrary  temper  of  the  military  officer.  India  and 
other  parts  of  our  unfree  Empire  educate  strong  types 
of  dominant  self-will,  rooted  in  conditions  which 
ultimately  stand  on  force  of  arms.  But  outside 
the  sphere  of  government  are  to  be  found  in  the 
authoritative  status  of  the  professional  man  and 
the  industrial  or  financial  magnate  distinct  traces  of 
the  same  arbitrary  disposition.  The  authority  of  the 
Church,  the  Law,  and  the  teaching  profession,  as 
the  experience  of  war  testifies,  easily  discovers  a 
kinship  with  military  discipline,  and  is  zealous  for 
the  forcible  suppression  of  spiritual  and  intellectual 
unorthodoxy.  Unorganized  as  well  as  organized 
violence  appeals  to  the  patriotism  of  some  active 
members  of  the  Press  as  the  proper  way  of  dealing 
with  unpopular  opinions.  The  master  spirit  in  the 
business  world  secretly  or  openly  welcomes  the 
presence  in  the  State  of  force,  which  he  recognizes 
he  may  need  so  as  to  curb  the  power  of  labour  in  an 
economic  conflict. 

The  closer  interplay  of  these  repressive  and  coercive 
forces  in  modern  society  will  form  the  subject  of 
fuller  analysis  in  a  later  chapter.  At  present  it  is 
only  necessary  to  note  their  emergence  in  the  glare 
of  war-time  as  natural  allies  of  militarism,  by  virtue 
of  some  sympathy  with  the  naked  "  will  to  power  " 
which  it  represents. 

It  is  this  desire  to  realize  one's  personal  importance, 
or  the  importance  of  one's  group  or  country,  by  over- 
bearing the  will  and  dominating  the  lives  of  other 
people,  that  is  the  inner  bond  of  union  among  the 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       23 

reactionary  forces  of  which  militarism  is  the  principal 
external  instrument.  Power  is  not  evil  in  itself,  nor 
is  the  desire  to  exercise  power.  The  desire  to  realize 
one's  personality  by  exercising  power  over  one's 
environment  is  a  normal,  wholesome  impulse.  The 
"  values  "  of  life  are  only  got  by  such  an  exercise  of 
personal  power.  The  parent,  the  poet,  the  artist,  the 
scientist,  the  inventor,  the  teacher,  the  philanthropist, 
the  artisan,  the  tiller  of  the  soil,  the  trader,  all  realize 
themselves  by  the  conscious  exercise  of  power.  But 
their  activities  and  the  will  that  actuates  them  are 
essentially  creative  in  the  sense  that  they  increase 
the  quantity  or  raise  the  quality  of  life  both  for 
themselves  and  for  others.  The  parent,  the  simplest 
example  of  creativeness,  enriches  his  experience 
of  life  by  giving  life  to  others.  The  poet,  the 
scientist,  the  artist,  similarly  achieve  truth  and 
beauty  for  themselves  by  communicating  it  to  others, 
and  so  adding  to  the  general  stock.  The  same  is  true 
of  the  normal  economic  activities  of  man.  So  far  as 
they  are  free  exercises  of  his  power,  they  are  creative 
of  wealth  in  which  he  and  those  with  whom  he  is 
in  intercourse  alike  are  sharers.  Such  self-realization 
through  creative  power,  when  exercised  upon  the 
material  environment,  the  intellectual  environment,  or 
directly  on  the  minds  of  other  persons,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  teacher,  is  good.  It  is  only  bad  when  it  ceases 
to  be  purely  creative  and  becomes  dominating.  This 
is  the  case  when  the  parent  comes  to  treat  his  family 
as  "  subjects  "  for  the  exercise  of  his  despotic  will, 
who  are  to  do  things  "  because  I  tell  you,"  or  as 
instruments  for  his  display  of  his  wealth,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  women  of  the  leisure  classes  ;  or  as  means  for 


24         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

adding  to  the  family  income,  as  with  man}''  children 
of  the  working  classes.  The  same  perversion  is 
found  in  the  artist,  poet,  scientist,  teacher,  inventor, 
when  they  subordinate  their  true  creative  function  to 
the  passion  for  imposing  ideas  or  tastes  on  others, 
or  of  pandering  to  popular  notions  or  valuations 
which  they  despise  in  order  to  get  tame  or  money 

Still  more  insidious  is  the  distortion  of  motives 
sometimes  seen  in  the  philanthropic  reformer,  when 
the  legitimate  interest  of  participating  in  a  socially 
serviceable  work  evokes  a  will  of  tyrannous  obstruc- 
tion to  the  good  enterprises  of  others. 

So  we  see  how  in  the  essentially  wholesome  activities 
creative  power  may  become  disastrously  obstructive 
or  even  destructive. 

The  fields  in  which  such  perversion  of  the  will 
power  are  most  widely  prevalent  and  most  injurious 
(outside  the  family)  are  politics  and  business.  For 
in  them  is  found  the  greatest  scope  for  the  play  of 
the  naked  lust  for  dominion  over  the  wills  and  lives 
of  others.  It  is  not  that  these  arts  are  repugnant 
to  the  exercise  of  true  creative  faculties.  Far  from  it. 
No  man  has  a  greater  opportunity  for  exercising  power 
in  a  creative  way  for  the  enlargement  of  human  values 
than  the  statesman  or  the  industrial  chief.  Their 
will  and  judgment  may  strengthen  the  foundation  of 
security  and  material  prosperity,  and  furnish  the 
means  and  stimuli  of  progress  for  whole  provinces 
and  peoples.  For  in  the  existing  order  it  rests  with 
them,  more  than  with  any  other  men,  to  determine 
the  social  and  economic  conditions  of  the  common  life. 
This  very  pivotal  position  of  the  statesman  and  the 
lord  of  industry,  however,  carries  temptations  that  are 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       25 

their  undoing.  For  this  there  are  two  reasons.  The 
first  is  best  indicated  in  Bacon's  famous  aphorism,  ap- 
plicable alike  to  politics  and  business,  that  "  There  is 
no  rising  to  high  place  but  by  crooked  stairs/'  This 
is  the  result  of  reflection  on  the  nature  of  the  compe- 
tition in  these  fields  and  of  the  combination  of  aggres- 
sive self-assertion  and  pliability  involved  in  success. 
While  the  true  creative  function  of  the  statesman,  the 
welfare  of  his  people,  is  of  the  highest  order,  all  the  ac- 
cessories of  his  career  contribute  to  select,  nourish  and 
furnish  opportunities  for  the  lower  satisfaction  of  the 
lust  of  domination.  The  great  scope  for  this  use 
of  power,  in  which  the  immediate  satisfaction  of  his 
personality  is  found  in  the  wielding  of  the  collective 
power  of  the  State,  thus  brings  it  to  pass  that  ambition 
and  the  love  for  power  for  its  own  sake  are  always 
recognized  as  the  besetting  sin  of  a  statesman. 

But  while  History  assigns  through  countless  ages 
the  first  role  in  the  drama  of  power  to  the  ruler  or  the 
military  conqueror,  a  re-assessment  of  modern  values 
compels  a  revision  of  this  judgment. 

Wealth  has  always  been  an  important  means  for 
the  satisfaction  of  the  lust  for  power.  But  in  its  early 
forms  it  served  chiefly  as  an  index  and  testimony  to 
personal  prowess,  family  prestige,  caste  superiority, 
or  ruling  strength.  It  came  either  as  spoils  of  battle, 
forced  product  of  servile  labour,  tolls,  tribute  or  taxes 
extorted  forcibly  from  weaker  persons,  and  was  used 
either  for  immoderate  gratification  of  physical  desires, 
for  ostentation,  or  for  the  support  of  the  human 
instruments  of  such  robbery  and  extortion.  This 
wealth  was  mainly  the  by-product  of  militarism  and 
political  rule  combined  in  the  hands  of  chiefs  or  a 
governing  caste. 


26  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

The  part  played  by  wealth  in  the  economy  of  power 
and  the  arts  of  militarism  and  war  was  radically 
altered  when  modern  capitalist  enterprise  set  in. 
Though  the  religious,  racial  and  dynastic  wars  of 
Europe  through  "  the  Middle  Ages  "  were  suffused 
and  often  dominated  by  economic  motives,  largely 
concerned  with  trade  routes  and  the  acquisition  of 
"  treasure/'  it  was  not  until  the  improved  art  of 
navigation  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries 
opened  up  "  the  high  seas  "  as  highways  of  commerce 
with  the  Indies  and  America,  while  the  beginnings 
of  machine  industry  laid  the  foundations  of  manu- 
facturing capitalism,  that  property  became  the  centre 
of  power.  When  capitalism  was  fairly  established 
in  commerce,  manufacture  and  finance,  by  great 
shipping  enterprise,  the  application  of  machinery 
and  power  to  manufactures  and  the  free  growth  of 
banking  and  joint-stock  companies,  economic  instru- 
ments and  motives  definitely  assumed  the  leading 
role  in  the  careers  of  ambitious  men  and  States. 
The  acquisition  and  use  of  property  became  the  chief 
channels  through  which  the  lust  of  power  sought 
and  found  satisfaction.  Capitalism,  or  the  use  of 
property  as  a  tool  of  commerce,  industry  or  finance, 
for  the  acquisition  of  profit,  henceforth  became  the 
leading  factor,  not  only  in  the  business  world,  but  in 
State  politics  and  in  international  relations.  This 
fact,  as  we  shall  perceive,  is  often  obscured  by  the 
tendency  to  cover  selfish  or  "  materialistic  "  motives 
by  others  that  are  more  reputable.  But,  as  we  trace 
the  actual  operation  of  "  power  "  in  the  modern  world, 
we  shall  perceive  in  the  often  complicated  design  the 
guiding  thread  of  capitalism. 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       27 


This  close  connection  is  clearly  traceable  in  the 
origins  of  modern  State  militarism,  with  its  great 
standing  armies  and  navies.  Though  armed  forces 
and  instruments  of  war  have  always  been  part  of  the 
equipment  of  government,  the  poverty  of  nations 
until  recent  times  made  it  impossible  to  keep  any  large 
proportion  of  a  nation  in  expensive  idleness  for  work 
of  destruction,  still  less  to  train  the  whole  manhood/ 
of  a  nation  for  armed  national  service.  These' two 
achievements  represent  the  reaction  of  capitalism 
upon  the  structure,  as  distinct  from  the  uses,  of 
militarism.  It  is  important  to  recognize  that  a 
fundamental  assumption  of  Cobdenism,  and  of  the 
liberalism  to  which  it  appertained,  that  war  and 
militarism  were  doomed  to  disappear  with  the  ad- 
vance of  industry  and  commerce,  is  definitely  false. 
Indeed,  a  large  part  of  the  analysis  upon  which  we 
are  engaged  is  devoted  to  showing  how  modern 
capitalism,  both  in  its  structure  and  its  operations, 
requires,  feeds  and  utilizes  militarism.  It  is  signi- 
ficant that  the  practice  of  maintaining  great  stand- 
ing armies  spread  through  the  European  system 
at  the  very  time  when  "  the  industrial  revolution  " 
was  beginning  to  make  way  and  when  the  profitable 
conquest  of  the  New  World  became  a  conscious  and 
continuous  policy  of  competing  States.  "  A  new 
disease/'  wrote  Montesquieu  in  the  middle  of  the* 
eighteenth  century,  "  has  spread  through  Europe : 
it  has  attacked  our  princes  and  made  them  set  up  an 
unlimited  quantity  of  troops.  It  has  its  crises,  and 
of  necessity  it  becomes  contagious.  For  as  soon  as 
one  State  increases  what  it  calls  its  '  forces/  the 
others    immediately    increase    theirs.      So    no    one 


28  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

gains,  but  all  are  plunged  in  common  ruin.  Each 
monarch  sets  up  all  the  forces  which  would  be  at 
his  disposal  if  his  people  were  in  danger  of  exter- 
mination, and  this  state  of  strife  of  all  against  all 
is  called  peace/'  In  other  words,  great  expensive 
standing  forces  first  became  possible  with  the  new 
wealth  of  rising  capitalism,  and  therefore  became 
necessary.  The  new  ruling  classes  in  each  State, 
a  conjunction  of  the  old  feudal  landlords  and  the 
new  magnates  of  commerce  and  industry,  required 
these  forces  for  their  protection  at  home  and  their 
political  and  economic  conquests  abroad,  and  were 
able  and  willing  out  of  the  new  surplus  of  wealth  at 
their  disposal  to  furnish  the  money  to  support  them. 

When  militarism  thus  became  a  great  business 
career  and  war  a  great  business  exploit,  the  differences 
formerly  existing  between  an  army  and  a  nation, 
combatant  and  civil  occupations,  tended  rapidly 
to  disappear.  As  the  modern  wealth  of  nations 
made  it  possible  to  train  all  men  to  arms,  so  the  con- 
ditions of  the  rivalry  of  nations  demanded  that  all  men 
should  so  be  trained.  Similarly,  the  modern  scien- 
tific equipment  of  these  fighting  nations  not  merely 
assigns  to  armaments  a  role  of  increasing  importance 
in  the  career  of  capitalism,  but  the  employment  of 
these  forces  in  actual  war  requires  the  subordination 
of  the  entire  productive  power  of  the  nation  to 
war-needs,    i.e.    industrial   conscription. 

This  historical  connection  between  the  rise  of 
capitalism  and  the  rise  of  militarism  follows  from 
the  fact  that  in  the  modern  world  power  is  realized 
more  and  more  through  property.  Now  property, 
like  power,  is  not  essentially  bad.     On  the  contrary, 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       29 

some  property,  some  portion  of  useful  matter  re- 
served for  the  use  of  a  particular  person,  is  necessary 
for  any  sort  of  life,  and  in  civilized  society  that 
property  should  consist  not  merely  of  some  stock  of 
consumable  goods,  but  of  some  tools  and  materials 
with  which  the  person  may  work  freely  and  construc- 
tively for  the  accomplishment  of  plans  or  purposes  of 
his  own.  Everyone,  in  order  to  be  a  free  person, 
ought  to  have  access  to  some  share  of  the  natural  and 
developed  resources  of  the  world,  and  to  the  general 
stock  of  knowledge  which  will  help  him  to  realize 
his  purposes  with  such  materials.  This  right  to 
property  flows  from  the  conception  of  a  free  person- 
ality in  a  world  of  equal  opportunity.  It  finds  its 
justification  in  the  demand  of  the  creative  impulses  for 
material  conditions  in  which  to  express  themselves. 
But  as  property  is  good  which  is  the  instrument 
or  the  embodiment  of  the  wholesome  creative  im- 
pulses of  human  beings,  so  it  is  bad  when  it  is 
the  instrument  or  the  embodiment  of  the  lust  of 
domination,  or  the  impulse  of  mere  acquisitiveness. 
Now,  the  modern  industrial  system  has  become 
more  and  more  an  instrument  by  which  certain  persons 
and  classes,  exercising  dominion  over  the  productive 
energies  of  other  persons  and  classes,  obtain  for  their 
private  use  or  possession  property  which  they  have 
not  created  and  for  which  they  have  given  no 
equivalent  personal  service.  This  bad  system  is 
commonly  designated  Capitalism,1  and  for  conveni- 

1  Capital  is,  of  course,  an  essential  factor  in  any  modern  system 
of  production.  Capitalism,  however,  signifies  a  system  controlled 
by  and  in  the  exclusive  interests  of  the  private  owners  of  that 
single  factor. 


30         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

ence  I  shall  adopt  that  term  in  dealing  with  those 
economic  processes  which  yield  bad  forms  of 
property,  although  the  term  does  not  cover  all  the 
defects.  It  is  no  part  of  my  purpose  here  to  ana- 
lyse in  detail  the  economic  system  so  as  to  display 
the  numerous  ways  in  which,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
wholesome  creative  impulses  of  man  are  thwarted 
and  repressed,  while  on  the  other  the  acquisitive 
and  dominating  impulses  are  nourished  and  grati- 
fied. I  can  only  refer  in  general  terms  to  the 
operations  of  an  economic  system  which  is  vitiated 
in  its  core  by  the  fact  that  every  person  who  takes 
part  in  it,  either  as  the  owner  of  some  factor  of  pro- 
duction or  as  the  claimant  to  some  share  of  the  pro- 
duct, is  normally  motived  neither  by  a  consideration 
of  the  creative  quality  of  the  work  done,  nor  by  the 
human  service  which  the  product  shall  render,  but 
by  the  quantity  of  material  gain  which  will  come  to 
him.  So  far  as  the  system  yields,  to  those  who  con- 
tribute to  it  their  productive  energy  of  mind  or  body, 
the  material  wherewithal  to  sustain  these  productive 
energies,  it  may  be  held  to  conform  to  a  sound  eco- 
nomy, supplying  out  of  the  product  of  industry  the 
necessary  human  "  costs  of  production/ '  But  when- 
ever the  working  of  the  business  world  furnishes 
over  and  above  these  "  costs  "  a  "  surplus,"  that  sur- 
plus is  taken  as  spoils  by  the  strongest  among  the 
parties  engaged  in  the  process  of  production.  Some- 
times it  is  a  landowner  who  takes  it  in  rent  or 
royalties.  Sometimes  it  is  an  employer  who  takes  it 
in  profit,  sometimes  an  investor  who  takes  it  in  divi- 
dends, or  a  financier  who  has  taken  the  lion's  share  at 
the  outset  in  the  floating  of  a  company.     But  in  the 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       31 

scramble  these  advantages  are  not  wholly  confined 
to  persons  who  operate  in  material  production.  Pro- 
fessional men,  officials,  artists  and  other  producers  of 
luxurious  services,  are  paid  in  similar  fashion  accord- 
ing to  the  strength  of  the  economic  pull  which  they 
possess  upon  the  general  production.  What  a  person 
gives  and  what  he  gets  are  alike  determined,  not  by 
any  sound  law  of  social  service,  but  by  the  degree  of 
economic  strength  which  he  can  bring  to  bear  upon 
the  processes  of  bargaining  by  which  he  sells  what  he 
has  to  sell  and  buys  what  he  has  to  buy. 

It  is  quite  evident  that  from  these  intricate  pro- 
cesses emerge  innumerable  shapes,  great  or  small, 
of  property  or  gain  which  is,  in  its  origin  and  nature, 
as  much  "  loot  "  as  the  cattle  raided  by  a  primitive 
tribe  from  the  pasture  of  a  neighbouring  tribe  or  the 
blackmail  taken  by  the  robber  baron  on  the  trade 
which  passed  through  his  domain.  The  adventure 
of  modern  business  is  mainly  concerned  with  the 
capture  of  these  forms  of  "  improperty."  In  the 
capitalist  system  the  process  is  called  "  profiteering/ ' 
Its  illegitimacy  is  concealed  by  the  fact  that  it  com- 
prises certain  payments  which,  under  the  actual 
system  of  modern  business,  are  necessary  payments 
for  securing  the  use  of  capital,  and  for  the  output  of 
ability  and  enterprise  on  the  part  of  employers  and 
organizers  of  business  operations. 

Now,  so  long  as  saving  and  the  application  of 
privately  owned  capital  are  the  recognized  modes  of 
providing  industries  with  the  plant,  materials,  etc., 
which  are  required,  the  minimum  interest  needed  to 
evoke  this  flow  of  capital  must  continue  to  rank  as 
a  necessary  cost  of  production.     The  same  holds  of 


32  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

that  part  of  "  profit  M  which  consists  of  payments 
needed  to  draw  ability  and  enterprise  into  the  conduct 
of  the  business.  Socialism  has  too  often  missed 
its  intellectual  mark  by  labelling  equally  as  plunder 
all  payments  taken  by  classes  whom  it  calls  capitalists, 
and  in  claiming  for  labour,  narrowly  confined  to  the 
work  of  wage-earners,  "  the  whole  product  "  of  in- 
dustry. In  dealing  with  the  actual  economic  system 
we  cannot  lump  the  whole  of  rents,  profit  and  interest 
as  plunder  from  the  working  classes.  A  more  dis- 
criminative analysis  is  needed  to  show  what  are  the 
unearned  or  excessive  payments  made  to  the  economi- 
cally strong  which  rightly  rank  as  "  surplus  "  or  "  im- 
property,"  and  which  represent  the  vicious  appor- 
tionment of  the  product  under  the  existing  system.1 
But  the  terms  capitalism  and  profiteering  serve 
here  to  convey  rightly  the  general  outcome  of  such 
an  analysis.  For  the  controllers  of  capital  are  not 
only  the  largest  recipients  of  "  surplus  "  wealth,  but 
they  are  the  personal  embodiment  of  what  is  dangerous 
and  wrong  in  the  economic  system,  considered  from 
the  standpoint  of  social  good.  So  long  as  the  actual 
direction  of  industry  is  in  the  hands  of  men  who  are 
motived,  not  by  the  desire  to  get  goods  produced 
and  distributed  in  ways  most  conducive  to  human 
welfare,  but  by  the  desire  for  personal  profit,  the 
contradiction  between  the  human  meaning  of  industry 
and  the  actual  play  of  economic  forces  will  persist. 
In  every  department  of  economic  activity,  agriculture, 

1  A  full  analysis  of  this  sort  is  attempted  in  my  work  "The 
Industrial  System  "  (Longmans),  while  the  social  significance  of 
its  operation  is  presented  in  my  "  Work  and  Wealth,  a  Human 
Interpretation"  (Macmillan). 


MILITARISM  AND  WILL  TO  POWER       33 

manufacture,  mining,  transport,  commerce  and 
finance,  in  every  one  of  those  arts  and  professions 
engaged  in  producing  non-material  wealth,  quantities 
of  unearned  income  emerge,  representing  the  superior 
bargaining  power  of  some  landlord,  capitalist, 
employer,  financier  or  other  professional  man,  derived 
from  the  possession  of  some  advantage  limiting 
freedom  of  competition  and  conveying  some  power 
to  enforce  terms  upon  buyers  or  sellers.  This  intricate 
and  all-pervasive  economic  force,  which  in  its  innumer- 
able secret  ways  breeds  improperty,  is  a  direct  source 
of  all  the  economic  and  most  of  the  moral  evils  in 
our  social  and  political  system.  It  is  the  most 
general  and  ubiquitous  abuse  of  power  and  the 
central  support  of  every  specific  abuse.  Not  only 
is  it  responsible  for  the  evil  contrasts  of  riches  and 
poverty,  leisure  and  toil,  luxury  and  want,  but 
disease,  ignorance,  crime,  sexual  vice,  intemperance 
and  every  form  of  brutality  and  folly  are  nourished 
in  the  bad  physical  environment  which  improperty 
provides.  The  possession  of  unearned  wealth  and  the 
control  of  the  instruments  which  produce  it,  being 
the  chief  method  of  exercising  the  domination  by 
which  the  will  to  power  is  realized,  thus  appear  as 
the  centre  of  the  conspiracy  of  reactionary  forces 
which  we  see  rallying  to  the  support  of  militarism. 
Our  survey  began  with  the  dramatic  opposition 
between  democracy  and  militarism.  We  then 
briefly  reviewed  the  allied  forces,  political,  social, 
intellectual  and  spiritual,  which  the  flare  of  war-time 
showed  gathering  round  militarism.  The  common 
characteristic  in  all  we  found  to  be  the  will  to  power, 
the  lust  of  personal  domination.     In  modern  times 

3 


34         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

the  possession  of  superior  economic  opportunity  is 
the  main  instrument  of  this  domination.  The 
system  of  capitalism,  as  the  repository  and  the  organ 
of  personal  and  class  power,  in  every  field  of  human 
activity,  is  seen  to  be  historically  connected  with 
the  growth  of  modern  militarism.  There  arises  a 
presumption  that  capitalism  needs  and  utilizes  mili- 
tarism, the  particular  outlet  for  power  which  mili- 
tarism furnishes  being  connected  with  the  broader 
and  more  various  domination  which  capitalism 
represents. 


CHAPTER   II 

MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM 

In  linking  up  militarism  and  the  policy  it  serves  with 
capitalism,  we  must  avoid  the  temptation  to  over- 
simplify the  issue.  The  economic  interpretation 
of  history  so  often  discredits  itself,  either  by  ignoring 
non-economic  factors,  or  by  ingenious  endeavours 
to  show  that  they  are  economic  in  the  last  resort. 
In  claiming,  therefore,  that  militarism  and  the 
domestic  and  foreign  policy  it  serves  are  moulded 
and  directed  chiefly  by  definite  and  conscious  business 
aims,  I  wish  to  make  it  clear  that  this  claim  does  not 
exclude  the  operation  of  other  impulses,  desires  and 
purposes.  The  fighting  instinct  surviving  in  various 
degrees  among  all  peoples,  and  often  artificially 
preserved  in  the  life  of  the  leisured  ruling  caste  and 
in  the  popular  pastimes,  is  a  direct  and  disinterested 
support  of  militarism.  The  zest  for  hazard  and 
adventure,  and  the  passion  for  physical  self-assertion 
and  personal  prowess,  evidently  count,  though  less 
in  modern  than  in  older  modes  of  warfare.  Struggles 
to  throw  off  the  domination  of  a  foreign  yoke,  or  of 
domestic  tyranny,  wars  of  defence  against  outside 
aggression  and  the  militarism  which  they  involve, 
are  inspired  by  fears  and  aspirations  for  the  most 
part  not  consciously  related  to  economic  ends.     Many 

35 


36  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

of  the  feelings  which  animate  such  struggles  express 
a  passion  for  personal  or  collective  liberty,  including 
the  sentiment  of  nationality,  based  on  contiguity  and 
racial,  linguistic,  religious  and  other  affinities,  and 
carrying  with  it  distrust  and  dislike  of  foreigners. 
In  the  main,  these  feeders  of  militarism  are  not 
merely  non-economic  in  nature  and  origin,  but  are 
free  from  that  passion  of  domination  which  is  the 
illegitimate  motive  for  the  use  of  power. 

Even  when  we  pass  from  such  legitimate  and 
genuinely  defensive,  or  merely  impulsive,  motives  of 
militarism  to  the  definitely  aggressive,  we  still  find 
that  other  non-economic  considerations  often  seem 
to  outweigh  the  distinctively  economic  ones.  The 
desire  of  rulers  or  of  peoples  to  punish  or  avenge 
themselves  upon  their  "  traditional  enemy,"  or  to 
extend  their  political  system  over  neighbouring 
lands  on  some  more  or  less  specious  plea  of  ancient 
rights  or  racial  affinity,  or  the  mere  passion  of  con- 
quest in  order  to  exercise  dominion  over  others,  the 
lust  of  kilometritis,  may  have  little  contact  with  any 
definitely  economic  motive.  The  ambition  of  the 
monarch,  the  statesman  or  the  general,  who  plans 
or  executes  such  aggressive  designs,  can  count  upon 
some  responsive  sentiment  in  his  people,  who  in 
most  instances  have  nothing  to  gain  and  every- 
thing to  suffer  from  such  foreign  exploits. 

Throughout  the  modern  imperialistic  movement, 
from  the  fourteenth  century  onward,  there  is,  as  we 
shall  see,  no  reason  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  the 
humanitarian  strains  which  have  tempered  the  greed 
of  gain  and  power.  The  desire  to  spread  the  true 
religion,  to  extend  the  blessings  of  civilization,  to 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  37 

elevate  the  lower  races  and  even  to  teach  them  the 
arts  of  self-government,  have  not  been  merely  hypo- 
critical pretences.  They  have  been  genuine  motives 
blending  with,  and  sometimes  even  dominating,  the 
more  selfish  ones.  They  may  be  said  to  distinguish 
the  "  mission  "  from  the  "  march  "  of  civilization  in 
the  history  of  imperialism. 

In  a  word,  militarism  and  the  State  policy  with 
which  it  is  associated  are,  like  other  human  conduct, 
a  composite  of  many  motives,  with  various  degrees 
of  consciousness  attaching  to  them.  What  we  have 
to  try  to  understand  is  not  so  much  the  magnitude 
or  force  of  these  several  motives  as  their  relations 
to  one  another  in  the  work  where  they  co-operate. 
In  explaining  these  relations  it  is  of  paramount  im- 
portance to  distinguish  the  volume  and  intensity 
of  the  motives  from  their  management  and  direction. 
Only  in  this  way  can  we  establish  the  important 
truth  which  the  economic  interpretation  contains. 
For  it  will  be  found  that,  though  the  sentimental  or 
instinctive  passions  of  pugnacity,  fear,  patriotism, 
nationalism,  humanitarianism,  appear  to  generate 
a  far  larger  volume  of  conscious  energy  for  the  support 
of  militarism,  alike  in  its  defensive  and  its  offensive 
work,  the  guidance  and  direction  of  these  sentiments 
mostly  come  from  the  economic  motives  which  fuse 
with  them  and  exploit  them. 

A  host  of  patriotic  sophists  have  been  at  work 
during  the  last  three  years  in  every  country  adver- 
tising the  nobility  of  their  cause  by  pretending  that 
economic  causes  have  no  proper  place  in  the  causa- 
tion of  the  war,  and  denouncing  those  who  hold  the 
contrary  as  "  materialists."     This  shallow  and  foolish 


38         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

perversion  of  history  is  accomplished  by  confining 
attention  to  a  narrow  range  of  diplomatic  documents, 
upon  the  one  hand,  and  a  false  stress  upon  Belgium 
and  Servia  as  local  causes  of  trouble,  on  the  other. 
By  this  device  the  really  dominant,  efficient  causes, 
viz.  the  struggle  between  France  and  Germany  for 
the  control  of  Morocco,  between  Russia  and  Austria 
for  the  control  of  the  Balkans,  between  Germany  and 
Russia,  France  and  Britain  for  the  control  of  the 
Turkish  Empire,  were  virtually  ignored.  Now,  that 
these  colonial  and  imperial  antagonisms  were  pre- 
dominantly economic,  in  the  sense  that  the  statesmen 
who  conducted  foreign  policy,  or  the  peoples  who 
rallied  to  their  appeals  to  national  aspirations,  were 
thinking  mainly  in  terms  of  trade  or  finance,  need  not 
be  contended.  The  doctrine  that  property  is  the 
typical  modern  instrument  of  power  carries  no  such 
implication.  The  real  assertion  that  underlies  this 
doctrine  is  that  the  selection  and  preparation  of  the 
concrete  issues,  which  force  their  way  into  the  front 
of  foreign  policy,  generate  trouble  between  States, 
and  mobilize  in  each  nation  the  vaguer  and  more 
disinterested  passions,  are  mainly  economic.  The 
ever-growing  urgency  for  large,  various,  free  outside 
profitable  markets  for  buying  and  for  selling,  especially 
the  access  to  favourable  supplies  of  raw  materials 
and  the  desire  for  exclusive  areas  for  lucrative  invest- 
ments and  personal  spheres  of  business  exploitation — 
these  keen  persistent  desires  of  strong  well-organized 
groups  of  business  men  within  each  Western  nation 
will  be  found  everywhere  to  supply  the  drivin  gforce 
in  foreign  and  colonial  policy  and  so  to  operate  as  a 
demand  for  militarism.     Attached  to  these  definitely 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  39 

commercial  and  financial  motives  are  other  less 
formulated  sentiments  connected  with  the  protection 
and  promotion  of  property  and  industrial  interests 
which  disguise  themselves  under  the  general  cloak 
of  conservatism. 

Germany,  as  the  country  where  the  policy  of 
militarism  is  most  clearly  exposed,  will  best  serve  to 
illustrate  the  interplay  of  economic  and  other  motives 
and  the  determinant  part  taken  by  the  former.  The 
following  review  of  the  concrete  factors  favouring 
an  early  war  policy  in  Germany  is  contained  in  the 
famous  despatch  sent  to  the  French  Foreign  Office 
in  the  summer  of  1913  by  M  Jules  Cambon,  French 
Ambassador  in  Berlin.1 

The  country  squires  represented  in  the  Reichstag  by 
the  Conservative  party  want  at  all  costs  to  escape  the 
death  duties  which  are  bound  to  come  if  peace  continues. 
In  the  last  sitting  of  the  session  which  has  just  closed, 
the  Reichstag  agreed  to  these  duties  in  principle.  It  is  a 
serious  attack  on  the  interests  and  the  privileges  of  the 
landed  gentry.  On  the  other  hand,  this  aristocracy  is 
military  in  character,  and  it  is  instructive  to  compare  the 
Army  List  with  the  Year  Book  of  the  Nobility.  War 
alone  can  prolong  its  prestige  and  support  its  family 
interest.  During  the  discussion  on  the  Army  Bill,  a 
Conservative  speaker  put  forward  the  need  for  promotion 
among  officers  as  an  argument  in  its  favour.  Finally,  this 
social  class,  which  forms  a  hierarchy  with  the  King  of 
Prussia  as  its  supreme  head,  realizes  with  dread  the 
democratization  of  Germany  and  the  increasing  power  of 
the  Socialist  party,  and  considers  its  own  days  numbered. 
Not  only  does  a  formidable  movement  hostile  to  agrarian 

'  Cd.  7717,  p.  15. 


40         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

protection  threaten  its  material  interests,  but  in  addition, 
the  number  of  its  political  representatives  decreases  with 
each  legislative  period.  In  the  Reichstag  of  1878,  out  of 
397  members,  162  belonged  to  the  aristocracy  ;  in  1898, 
83  ;  in  1912,  57.  Out  of  this  number  27  alone  belong  to 
the  Right,  14  to  the  Centre,  7  to  the  Left,  and  one  sits 
with  the  Socialists. 

The  higher  bourgeoisie,  represented  by  the  National 
Liberal  party,  the  party  of  the  contented  spirits,  have  not 
the  same  reasons  as  the  squires  for  wanting  war.  With  a 
few  exceptions,  however,  they  are  bellicose.  They  have 
their  reasons,  social  in  character.  The  higher  bourgeoisie 
is  no  less  troubled  than  the  aristocracy  at  the  democratiza- 
tion of  Germany.  .  .  .  Uneasily  balanced  to-day  between 
Conservative  instincts  and  Liberal  ideas,  they  look  to  war 
to  settle  problems  which  their  parliamentary  representa- 
tives are  painfully  incapable  of  solving.  In  addition, 
doctrinaire  manufacturers  declare  that  the  difficulties 
between  themselves  and  their  workmen  originate  in 
France,  the  home  of  revolutionary  ideas  of  freedom. 
Without  France  industrial  unrest  would  be  unknown. 

Lastly,  there  are  the  manufacturers  of  guns  and  armour 
plate,  big  merchants  who  demand  bigger  markets,  bankers 
who  are  speculating  on  the  coming  of  the  golden  age  and 
the  next  war  indemnity — all  these  regard  war  as  good 
business. 

Among  the  "  Bismarckians  "  must  be  reckoned  officials 
of  all  kinds,  represented  fairly  closely  in  the  Reichstag  by 
the  Free  Conservatives  or  Imperial  party.  This  is  the 
party  of  the  H  pensioned "  whose  impetuous  sentiments 
are  poured  out  in  the  Post.  They  find  disciples  and 
political  sympathizers  in  the  various  groups  of  young  men 
whose  minds  have  been  trained  and  formed  in  the  public 
schools  and  universities.  The  universities,  if  we  except  a 
few  distinguished  spirits,  develop  a  warlike  philosophy. 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  41 

Economists  demonstrate  by  statistics  Germany's  need  for 
a  colonial  and  commercial  empire,  commensurate  with  the 
industrial  output  of  the  Empire.  There  are  sociological 
fanatics  who  go  even  further.  The  armed  peace,  so  they 
say,  is  a  crushing  burden  on  the  nations  ;  it  checks  im- 
provement in  the  lot  of  the  masses  and  resists  the  growth 
of  socialism.  .  .  . 

Historians,  philosophers,  political  pamphleteers  and 
other  apologists  for  German  Kultur  wish  to  impose  upon 
the  world  a  way  of  thinking  and  feeling  specifically 
German.  .  .  .  We  come  finally  to  those  whose  support 
of  the  war-policy  is  inspired  by  rancour  and  resentment. 
These  are  the  most  dangerous.  They  are  recruited  chiefly 
among  diplomatists.  German  diplomatists  are  now  in 
very  bad  odour  in  public  opinion.  The  most  bitter  are 
those  who  since  1905  have  been  engaged  in  the  negotia- 
tions between  France  and  Germany  ;  they  are  heaping 
together  and  reckoning  up  their  grievances  against  us, 
and  one  day  they  will  present  their  accounts  in  the 
war- press. 

This  analysis,  though  somewhat  overstressing  the 
part  played  in  German  policy  and  sentiments  by 
antagonism  to  France,  gives  powerful  emphasis  to 
the  leading  economic  motives  and  their  intellectual 
allies. 

No  clearer  presentment  of  the  issue  of  militarism 
against  democracy  has  yet  been  made. 

The  landlords  of  Germany  were  ready  to  plunge 
the  nation  into  war  in  order  to  safeguard  their  '*  rights 
and  privileges/'  which,  concretely  interpreted,  mean 
the  right  to  escape  taxation  and  the  privilege 
to  tax  their  countrymen  by  agrarian  protective 
duties. 


42         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

The  capitalist  bourgeoisie  wanted  war  for  three 
chief  purposes  : — 

1.  To  settle  problems  of  "  industrial  unrest  M 
which  threatened  revolution,  and  which  they 
could  not  hope  to  settle  by  constitutional 
methods ; 

2.  To  gain  lucrative  foreign  markets  and 
areas  of  financial  penetration; 

3.  To  make  profits  out  of  armaments,  war 
contracts  and  war  finance. 

With  them  stood  the  diplomatists,  the  bureaucrats, 
and  the  academic  mercenaries  of  the  universities  and 
the  intellectual  coteries. 

Yes,  some  will  say,  this  is  the  vicious  combination 
of  forces  which  made  German  militarism  and  precipi- 
tated war.  But  our  militarism,  that  of  Britain  and 
of  France,  at  any  rate,  was  essentially  different :  it 
was  defensive,  not  aggressive,  it  had  no  definitely 
economic  policy,  it  was  not  against  democracy.  How 
far  would  a  similarly  penetrating  analysis  to  that  of 
M.  Cambon,  applied  to  France,  Britain  and  other 
militarist  Powers,  bear  out  these  assumptions  ? 

Are  not  the  salient  facts  of  the  situation  much  the 
same  in  every  country,  qualified  by  special  circum- 
stances ?  Where  the  landowning  class  has  fused 
more  completely  with  the  industrial  plutocracy,  as 
in  Great  Britain,  there  is  not  the  same  edge  to  the 
exclusively  agrarian  policy.  Where  colonization  is 
approaching  the  stage  of  satiety,  as  in  Great  Britain 
and  France,  the  aggressive  strain  of  imperialism  is 
modified. 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  43 

But  in  every  one  of  the  Great  Powers  we  can 
clearly  discern  as  principal  supports  and  stimuli  of 
militarism  and  of  a  forceful  policy,  the  same  four 
impelling  interests  which  M.  Cambon  found  in 
Germany  : — 

1.  The  armament  trades,  with  the  professional 
fighting  services; 

2.  The  general  interests  of  the  propertied 
classes  in  relation  to  (a)  the  control  of  labour, 
(b)  the  issue  of  taxation; 

3.  Protectionism; 

4.  Colonialism  and  imperialism. 

Though,  as  is  obvious,  these  interests  dovetail 
into  one  another,  it  is  convenient  to  give  them  some 
separate  consideration. 

The  general  connection  which  we  have  noted 
between  the  rise  of  modern  capitalism  and  the  appear- 
ance of  expensive  standing  armies  and  navies  called 
attention,  even  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  to  the  dangerous  scandal  of  the  fortunes 
rapidly  accumulated  by  army  contractors.  But  in 
more  recent  times,  chiefly  owing  to  the  abnormally 
rapid  development  of  the  machinery  of  offence  and 
defence  by  land  and  sea  and  of  the  science  of 
explosives,  the  armaments  trades  have  become  one 
of  the  most  lucrative  and  important  branches  of 
capitalist  industry. 

In  more  recent  times  the  most  sinister  feature  of 
the  industrial  system  in  every  developed  country 
has  been  the  growing  size,  variety  and  importance  of 
business  firms  applying  the  sciences  of  chemistry 


44         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

and  engineering  to  the  supply  of  ever  more  elaborate 
and  expensive  instruments  of  war.  These  powerful 
producers  of  warships,  guns  and  ammunition  are,  of 
course,  only  the  more  visible  and  obtrusive  part  of 
a  vast  system  of  co-ordinated  businesses  devoted  to 
supplying  the  numerous  needs  of  militarism  and 
taking  their  profits  from  the  growing  public  expendi- 
ture on  it.  For  several  decades  before  this  war  in  all 
the  civilized  nations  of  the  world,  except,  perhaps, 
the  United  States,  the  annual  expenditure  upon 
armaments  was  growing  at  a  faster  pace  than  the 
aggregate  national  income.  In  other  words,  the 
businesses  catering  for  militarism  were  becoming  a 
factor  of  increasing  importance  in  the  industrial 
system.  But  their  growing  importance  as  agents  of 
militarism  and  of  the  foreign  policy  which  militarism 
expresses,  is  by  no  means  adequately  measured  by 
their  mere  size.  In  the  business  structure  and 
methods  of  the  great  armament  firms,  Krupps, 
Schneiders,   Armstrongs  and  the  rest,  we  find  the 

(power  of  concentrated  capitalism  more  successfully 
adapted  to  the  exploitation  of  politics  for  profiteering 
ends  than  in  any  other  industry.  Their  only  serious 
competitor  in  this  country  has  been  the  Liquor 
Trade,  and  the  power  and  profits  of  the  latter  are 
waning,  while  theirs  are  waxing.  For  the  firms 
which  in  ordinary  times  have  the  handling  of  the 
huge  contracts  for  armaments  in  each  country  are 
very  few  in  number.  In  Great  Britain,  in  19 14,  the 
firms  with  a  subscribed  capital  of  over  £1,000,000, 
mainly  or  largely  devoted  to  armaments,  were  only 
twelve  in  number  x  and  several  of  these  twelve  were 
1  Cf.  "  The  War  Traders,"  by  G.  H.  Perris,  p.  8. 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  45 

owned  in  part,  and  so  controlled,  by  the  great  firms 
of  Armstrong,  Vickers,  Cammell  Laird  and  John 
Brown.  Though  a  swarm  of  subsidiary  industries 
have  sprung  up  connected  with  explosives  or  fire-arms, 
or  with  the  supply  of  aircraft,  etc.,  some  half-dozen 
great  firms  were  predominant  in  financial  strength 
and  in  political  pull.  The  processes  of  amalgamation, 
interlocking  directorates,  and  various  forms  of  com- 
bination and  trade  agreements,  had  welded  the 
different  firms  and  trades  into  a  fairly  conscious 
solidarity  of  interest,  the  nature  and  purposes  of 
which  were  well  illustrated  in  the  revelations  made  in 
1913  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Estimates,  of  the 
operations  of  the  "  four  great  firms  M  forming  the 
Armour  Plate  Ring.  The  business  interests  of 
Sheffield  and  Birmingham,  the  Clyde  and  the  Tyne, 
became  more  and  more  linked  up  with  militarism.1 
Similarly  in  France,  the  great  military  and  naval 
armament  firms,  grouped  for  most  purposes  in  two 
syndicates,  consisted  of  a  small  number  of  powerful 
and  profitable  firms,  with  Schneider,  La  Societe  de 
la  Marine,  the  St.  Nazaire  and  the  Chatillon  Com- 
menty  firms  at  the  head,  actively  engaged  in  working 
high  politics  for  lucrative  contracts. 

1  "  Sheffield  enjoyed  in  1913  a  period  of  abundant  trade,  and 
those  departments  which  manufacture  munitions  of  war  for  the 
British  and  foreign  Governments  have  never  been  better  off. 
Excellent  orders  were  received  for  armour,  guns  and  projectiles  ; 
the  plants  were  constantly  engaged  at  the  fullest  capacity,  and 
the  work  or  prospects  of  work  at  present  in  sight  are  sufficient 
to  keep  them  occupied  for  five  years  to  come"  (The  Times 
Engineering  Supplement,  January  28,  1914). 

Yet  there  are  those  who  contend  that  we  were  not  prepared 
and  not  preparing  for  war  ! 


46         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

In  Italy,  Russia  and  Japan,  both  naval  and  military 
equipment  was  largely  financed  and  executed  by  the 
great  British  and  French  firms,  or  by  national  com- 
panies in  which  Armstrong,  Vickers,  Schneiders  and 
the  international  trusts  of  which  they  were  members 
were  dominant  partners.  The  British  and  French 
armament  and  steel  interests  notoriously  played  a 
great  part  in  the  promotion  of  the  Anglo-French 
alliance  and  the  entente  with  Russia. 

German  armament  firms  have  similarly  syndicated 
into  a  few  immense  groups  in  which  the  Loewe, 
Krupp,  Nobel  firms  have  been  conspicuous  heads. 
They,  too,  have  extended  their  business  operations 
to  Italy  and  Russia  (though  on  a  diminishing  scale 
in  recent  years),  to  Turkey,  Belgium  and  the 
Balkans. 

Virtually  the  whole  of  this  business  is  done  with 
Governments,  their  own  or  foreign.  In  bargaining 
with  Government  departments  they  are  in  a  pecu* 
liarly  strong  position  to  obtain  contracts  and  to 
dictate  prices.  Their  small  numbers  enable  them 
more  easily  to  limit  competition  in  tendering  for 
contracts,  and  in  securing  prices  from  Government 
officials,  who  have  neither  the  expert  knowledge  nor 
an  adequate  incentive  to  keep  down  the  cost.  The 
business  relations  between  themselves  and  with  their 
Government  are  further  facilitated,  on  the  one  hand, 
by  interlocking  directorates,  on  the  other,  by  the 
employment  of  retired  Army  and  Admiralty  officials 
as  directors  of  armament  firms.  The  helplessness  of 
the  Government  to  protect  the  public  purse  against 
the  combined  strength  of  the  private  armament 
firms  was  recently  illustrated  by  the  open  admission 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  47 

of  the  Under  Secretary  for  Munitions  in  the  House  of 
Commons  l  that  the  Government  had  been  paying 
for  a  long  time  past  twenty  shillings  each  for  shells 
which  the  firm  in  question  was  willing  under  subse- 
quent pressure  to  make  for  12s.  6d. 

On  the  directorate  of  these  companies  and  among 
their  large  shareholders  are  many  Members  of  Parlia- 
ment and  high  Government  officials.  In  quiet  times 
it  is  the  manifest  interest  of  these  persons  to  press 
the  Government  for  contracts,  irrespective  of  the 
immediate  need  for  ships  and  guns,  in  order  to  keep 
in  being  the  plant  and  skilled  labour  which  might  be 
wanted  for  a  national  emergency,  and  to  conduct 
experiments  in  the  latest  development  of  destruction 
and  defence.  It  is  notorious  that  in  this  and  other 
countries  expensive  orders  have  been  doled  out  to 
private  firms  while  Government  arsenals  have  been 
left  with  idle  plant  and  reduced  staffs  in  order  to 
practise  this  strange  national  economy.  It  might 
be  supposed  that  the  ordinary  precaution  would  have 
been  taken  to  secure  for  the  nation  the  exclusive 
services  of  the  plant  and  skill  thus  subsidized.  Not 
at  all.  These  firms  have  been  free  to  sell  the  products 
of  a  skilled  scientific  industry,  heavily  subsidized  as 
vital  to  the  national  security,  to  the  Governments  of 
foreign  countries  which  might  at  any  time  become 
our  enemies.  This  truly  humorous  situation  was,  of 
course,  doubly  advantageous  to  the  armament  firms. 
For  it  not  only  enlarged  their  profitable  market,  but 
it  laid  the  foundation  for  more  business  to  come  in 
ways  analogous  to  those  commonly  imputed  to  the 
plumber.  Every  improved  ship,  or  gun  or  explosive, 
1  October  24,  1916. 


48         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

supplied  either  directly  or  indirectly  to  a  foreign 
State  which  might  be  an  enemy,  set  up  a  correspond- 
ing demand  for  more  ships,  guns  and  explosives  in 
other  countries,  and  was  used  with  particular  effect 
to  stimulate  new  orders  in  the  country  whose  firm  had 
initiated  the  new  business  move.  This,  indeed,  was 
a  fairly  open  move  in  the  more  intricate  game  by 
which  in  every  country  the  armament  firms  have 
intrigued  and  conspired  to  promote  this  profligate 
competition  between  their  own  and  other  Govern- 
ments. This  is  not  the  place  to  describe  the  detailed 
devices  employed,  the  debauching  of  the  Press,  the 
bribery  of  officials,  the  false  information  conveyed 
to  Governments  in  order  to  evoke  new  contracts  by 
misrepresenting  the  operations  and  plans  of  other 
Governments.  Secrecy  is  of  the  essence  of  such 
business.  But  the  number  of  recent  dramatic  revela- 
tions in  this  country,  France,  Germany,  Russia, 
Japan  and  America,  will  compel  any  man  accus- 
tomed to  weigh  evidence  to  the  conclusion  that 
these  crooked  methods  of  stimulating  the  ill-will 
and  fears  of  nations  for  private  profitable  ends  are 
a  normal  feature  of  the  policy  of  the  armaments 
business. 

It  is  the  crowning  logic  of  the  situation  that  this 
industry,  which  exists  for  the  purpose  of  expressing 
in  policy  and  practice  the  antagonism  of  nations, 
should  in  its  structure  have  achieved  the  highest  form 
of  internationalism.  Not  merely  do  the  armament 
firms  in  the  several  countries  play  into  one  another's 
hands,  but  they  have  direct  material  community  of 
interests  and  a  formal  capitalistic  organization  for 
realizing  them.     The  full  evidence  of  this  statement 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  49 

and  its  significance  for  militarism  and  foreign  policy 
have  been  set  forth  in  Mr.  Walton  Newbold's  masterly 
work,  "  How  Europe  Armed  for  War,"  "  and  is  too 
voluminous  for  adequate  citation  here.  I  will  con- 
tent myself  with  two  illustrations  of  the  international 
capitalism  of  the  armaments  industry. 

In  1894,  soon  after  the  British  Admiralty  had  ordered 
17,000  tons  of  Harveyized  armour  for  the  new  "  scare " 
programme  and  when  the  Russians,  French,  Germans  and 
Italians  had  also  adopted  it,  the  Harvey  International 
Steel  Company  was  incorporated.  These  were  its  first 
directors  : — 

Charles  Cammell, 

Charles  E.  Ellis  (John  Brown  &  Co.), 

Edward   M.    Fox   (Harvey   Steel  Company,  of  New 

Jersey), 
Maurice  Geny  (Schneider  et  Cie.), 
Leon    Levy   (Chairman,    Chatillon    Commenty    Cie., 

France), 
Joseph  de  Montgolfier  (Compagnie  de  la  Marine  et 

des  Chemins  de  Fer,  France), 
Joseph  Ott  (A.-G.  Dillinger  Huttenwerke,  Germany), 
Ludwig  Krupp  (A.-G.  Friedrich  Krupp), 
Albert  Vickers. 

And  this  was  in  the  days  when  France  and  Russia  were 
our  fiercest  rivals,  and  when  those  two  nations  were  con- 
testing with  Germany  for  military  pre-eminence. 

But  scarcely  were  the  Harveyized  steel-plates  the 
accepted  fashion  when  Ernst  Ehrensburger  perfected  the 
superior  Krupp  cementation  process  in  1896.  Next  year 
the     British,    French    and    American     companies    were 

1  Blackfriars  Press,  is.  3d. 

4 


50         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

permitted  to  share  the  lucrative  secret,  and  the  Harvey 
Companies  socialized  the  new  methods  in  the  interests  of 
the  armament  international. 

The  cost  of  the  new  installation  was  enormous,  and  so 
was  that  of  the  new  armour,  but  the  nations  paid  up 
cheerfully  and  the  firms  suffered  no  inconvenience,  but 
speedily  found  the  ample  reward  of  genius. 

The  Harvey  armour  soon  brought  the  armour-clad 
armaments  back  to  favour,  even  greater  than  ever,  and 
greatly  encouraged  the  building  policies  of  the  Powers.1 

The  Nobel  Trust,  only  dissolved  after  the  opening 
of  the  war,  was  not  less  remarkable  in  its  financial 
constitution.  Incorporated  in  London  in  1886,  the 
Nobel  Dynamite  Trust  was  founded  to  hold  the 
shares  of 

The  Rheinische  Dynamit  Fabrik, 
The  Dresden  Dynamit  Fabrik, 
The  Dynamit  A.-G., 
The  Deutsche  Sprengstoffe  A.-G., 
The  Nobel  Explosives  Company, 
The  Alliance  Explosives  Company, 
La  Societe  Nobel  (Avigliano,  Italy). 

The  first  four  [Mr.  Newbold  informs  us]  had  really  been 
owned  by  the  Commerz  und  Disconto  Bank  of  Hamburg, 
and  the  Nobel  Explosives  Company  by  the  Commercial 
and  Union  Banks  of  Scotland.  Next  a  French-Italian 
group  of  Nobel  firms  was  formed,  and  an  agreement 
was  entered  into  between  the  two  groups  to  combine  for 
twenty-four  years.    This  was  renewed  in  191 1.2 

It  is  at  first  sight  a  curious  commentary  upon 
capitalism  that  its  highest  development  of  structure 

1  Newbold,  op.  cit.  p.  40.  a  Op.  cit.  p.  44. 


MILITARISM  AND  CAPITALISM  51 

should  be  in  an  industry  whose  raison  d'etre  is  the 
destruction  of  modern  civilization.  Further  reflection 
may,  however,  show  that  this  is  a  quite  natural  and 
logical  result  of  the  evolution  of  industry  under  the 
disintegrating  motive  of  private  profit. 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY 

But  while  the  armament  businesses  constitute  the 
capitalist  backbone  of  militarism,  tending  more  and 
more  to  become  active  causes  instead  of  mere  instru- 
ments, we  must  not  be  led  to  exaggerate  the  part  they 
play.  They  can  only  trade  upon  and  artfully  inflame 
the  fears,  suspicions,  jealousies  and  conflicts  of  interest 
which  already  exist.  These  primary  motives  are 
for  the  most  part  otherwise  generated.  In  order  to 
understand  their  nature  and  origin,  we  have  to  delve 
beneath  several  superficial  strata  of  interpretation. 
Why  should  States  so  fear  and  suspect  one  another, 
why  should  they  presume  such  conflicts  of  interest 
as  to  oblige  them  to  make  armed  preparations  on  a 
larger  and  larger  scale,  absorbing  larger  and  larger 
quantities  of  men  and  wealth  in  military  service  ? 

When  political  power  becomes  more  and  more 
closely  implicated  with  economic  considerations, 
i.e.  when  the  State  policy  can  be  utilized  in  many 
ways  to  the  advantage  of  the  propertied  and  business 
classes,  by  conserving  and  increasing  the  "  rights" 
of  property  and  the  legal,  economic  and  political 
supports  on  which  they  rest,  a  strong  factor  of  military 
force    in    the    background    becomes    of   paramount 

importance.    We  have  already  recognized  that  these 

52 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   53 

"  rights  "  of  property  comprise  many  "  wrongs,"  and 
that  in  every  advanced  industrial  nation  more  and 
more  vigorous  popular  movements  are  directed  to 
the  redress  of  these  wrongs.     In  this  country,  as  in 
others,    these    movements    of    political,    social    and 
economic  reform  are  recognized  by  the  ruling  and 
possessing    classes    as    attacks    on    property.     The 
classes    everywhere    prepare    defences.     The    nature 
of  these  defences  is  determined  by  the  attack.     Now, 
in  most  countries  the  attack  upon  improperty  is  an 
integral  factor  in  every  form  of  the  democratic  move- 
ment.    Reforms  in  land  tenure  and  in  housing,  in 
taxation  and  rating,  most  factory  and  other  industrial 
laws,  much  hygienic,  temperance  and  moral  legisla- 
tion, involve  frontal  attacks   on  some   form  of  im- 
property.     Other   popular   demands   for   education, 
recreation,  insurance,  pensions,  etc.,  requiring  large 
outlays  of  public  money,  are   resented  as  burdens 
upon   property.      The   labour   movement,   alike    on 
its  economic  and  its  political  side,  is  chiefly  directed 
to  the  redress  of  grievances  or  the  assertion  of  claims 
obnoxious  to  the  interests  of  the  propertied  classes. 
Even  those  movements  not  directly  economic  in  their 
aim  and  method,  such  as  those  for  extension  of  the 
franchise  and  other  improvements   of  electoral  and 
governmental  machinery,   are   largely  actuated    by 
the  express  or  implied  desire  to  use  for  economic 
purposes  the  enlarged  powers  of  popular  self-govern- 
ment.    In  all  these  ways  the  democratic  movement 
is  hostile  to  improperty. 

Now,  improperty  has  many  subtler  and  safer 
methods  of  defending  itself  than  a  resort  to  physical 
force.    It  usually  has  the  law  upon  its  side.    For  com- 


54         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

paratively  few  abuses  of  property  involve  breaches  of 
the  laws,  which  for  the  most  part  have  themselves 
been  made  by  the  propertied  classes  in  every  country. 
Where  they  do  involve  breaches  of  the  law,  all  trouble- 
some consequences  can  commonly  be  evaded,  except 
in  very  simple  and  flagrant  instances,  by  the  power 
which  property  possesses  to  buy  the  most  expert 
legal  aid,  to  involve  the  poorer  adversary  in  expensive 
processes  of  litigation,  conducted  in  courts  presided 
over  by  judges  likely,  from  their  social  status  and 
their  training,  to  be  sympathetic  with  the  cause  of 
improperty,  and  often  themselves  directly  interested 
in  its  maintenance.  Moreover,  if  the  law  does  not 
afford  an  adequate  defence  of  improperty,  it  can  be 
amended  for  the  purpose,  assuming,  as  is  commonly 
the  case,  that  the  legislature  contains  a  large  enough 
proportion  of  persons  interested  in  seeing  that  this 
is  done.  Most  legislators  in  industrially  developed 
countries  have  personal  "  stakes  in  the  country " 
involving  some  abuse  of  economic  power,  or  else  are 
lawyer-politicians  with  professional  interests  in  defend- 
ing such  abuses.  Lawyers,  bankers,  brewers,  railway 
directors  and  magnates  of  industry  and  commerce 
always  compose  the  great  majority  in  nearly  all 
legislative  houses,  and  though  a  conflict  between 
propertied  interests  may  sometimes  divide  them, 
for  the  essential  work  of  defending  and  improving 
improperty  a  sufficient  majority  can  almost  always 
be  relied  upon.  Against  such  hard  facts  the  principle 
of  popular  representation  affords  no  protection,  for 
the  interests  of  the  people  are  commonly  diffused 
and  dimly  realized,  whereas  the  interests  of  property 
are   concentrated   and   clearly   comprehended.     The 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   55 

control  of  the  party  machinery,  the  Press  and  other 
instruments  for  making  and  dividing  public  opinion 
in  the  electorate  has  enabled  the  forces  of  property 
to  keep  a  fairly  reliable  grip  upon  the  legislative  and, 
what  is  even  more  important,  the  administrative 
machinery  of  the  nation. 

Nevertheless,  there  always  lurks  a  vague  fear  in 
the  background  of  the  mind  of  the  ruling  classes  lest 
their  methods  of  pacific  defence  may  fail.  This  fear 
takes  more  definite  shape  as  peoples  become  more 
educated  and  show  more  capacity  of  economic  and 
political  organization.  The  problems  of  education 
and  organization  are  exceedingly  embarrassing  for 
property  and  capitalist  control.  The  old  feudal 
holds  of  habitual  and  personal  allegiance  to  a  local 
chief  and  master  are  no  longer  available  either  for 
business  or  for  electoral  control.  Large  joint-stock 
companies  upon  the  one  hand,  and  city  life  upon  the 
other,  have  destroyed  the  personal  nexus.  The  more 
abstract  and  inhuman  modus  operandi  of  modern 
capitalism  facilitates  and  evokes  discontent  and 
criticism.  The  necessary  conditions  of  an  industry 
which  brings  large  numbers  of  workers  and  citizens 
into  close  and  constant  association  make  out  of  this 
criticism  a  basis  of  effective  organization.  Again, 
some  rising  minimum  of  education  and  trained  in- 
telligence is  essential  to  the  profitable  working  of  the 
modern  arts  of  industry.  Modern  workers  must  know 
how  to  read  and  write.  Yet  even  this  nibbling  at 
the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  knowledge  is  a  disturbing 
influence.  How  to  keep  the  working-class  education 
upon  a  safe,  low  level  has  become  a  serious  problem 
for  the  ruling  and  possessing  classes  in  every  country. 


56  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

German  rulers  have  dared  to  raise  their  standard  of 
popular  education  to  a  higher  level  than  elsewhere, 
because  the  rapid  recent  rise  of  Germany  from  feudal- 
ism has  left  them  with  powerful  sentimental  and 
traditional  controls  which  our  ruling  classes  no  longer 
possess.1  Our  rulers  have  been  more  grudging  in 
their  educational  concessions,  with  the  result  that 
they  now  perceive  to  their  alarm  that  they  are  falling 
behind  in  the  profitable  arts  of  industry.  If  only 
there  were  some  way  of  keeping  education  on  a 
narrowly  technical  utilitarian  level  without  imparting 
a  general  intelligence  that  bred  ideas,  promoted 
criticism  and  facilitated  organization,  that  would  be 
grand  !  Indeed,  in  a  timid,  fumbling  fashion  our 
propertied  classes,  both  as  rulers  and  philanthropists, 
have  been  experimenting  along  these  lines.  Their 
failure  is  manifest  and  so  is  its  cause.  The  sort  of 
narrow  efficiency  they  sought  to  evoke  is  not  attain- 
able. The  progress  of  modern  capitalist  industry 
makes  innumerable  demands  upon  applied  science, 
intelligence,  initiative,  responsibility  and  other  intel- 
lectual and  moral  factors,  not  merely  for  a  few  organiz- 
ing and  managing  "  bosses  "  but  for  whole  grades  of 
workers.  Nothing  less  than  an  educated  and  intelli- 
gent community  will  suffice  to  yield  the  economic 
powers  needed  for  the  more  refined  and  profitable 
processes  of  progressive  industry.  But  the  educated 
and  intelligent  community  will  want  more  leisure, 

1  Professor  Veblen,  in  his  interesting  work  **  Imperialism  and 
Modern  Germany,"  traces  the  superior  militarist  power  of 
Germany  to  this  temporary  reconcilement  of  two  ultimately 
incompatible  influences,  feudal  discipline  and  industrial 
capitalism. 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   57 

more  comforts  and  an  altogether  higher  standard  of 
living.  They  will  put  forth  larger  and  better  organ- 
ized demands  for  a  share  in  the  control  of  business 
and  will  back  them  by  their  votes  as  an  electorate. 
All  this  signifies  a  formidable  encroachment  upon 
the  rights  and  fruits  of  property  !  How  to  make 
intelligent  efficient  workmanship  consistent  with  a 
submissive  disposition,  this  is  the  crux.  Prussia,  as 
we  perceive,  has  succeeded  best  in  achieving  this 
reconciliation.  But  even  there,  where  the  prestige 
of  the  governing  classes  is  supported  by  an  oligarchic 
system  of  representation  and  an  irresponsible 
monarchy,  political  and  legal  supports  have  not 
appeared  to  afford  security  to  power  and  property. 
Prussian  military  policy  has  other  specious  origins 
and  motives,  but  one  most  obvious  appeal,  as  M. 
Cambon  indicates,  is  that  of  furnishing  an  ade- 
quate defence  against  the  forces  of  social  democracy 
which  industrialism  and  education  have  evoked. 
There,  as  elsewhere,  compulsory  military  service 
operates  in  two  ways  to  repress  the  unruly  aspirations 
of  the  workers.  It  puts  all  their  youth  under  a 
regimen  of  iron  discipline,  so  as  to  teach  them  obedi- 
ence to  the  master-class  and  to  break  their  own 
incipient  will  to  power.  It  keeps  in  constant  evidence 
a  repressive  instrument  of  overwhelming  force  for 
the  defence  of  property  and  public  order,  at  the 
disposal  of  the  master  class.  Every  worker  is  a 
soldier,  and  may  be  called  upon  to  shoot  his  fellow- 
workers,  should  the  masters  declare  that  it  is  necessary. 
Has  he  the  will  to  refuse,  still  more  has  he  the  will  to 
place  his  military  skill  and  training  at  the  disposal 
of  his  fellow-workers  and  against  his  masters  ?     In 


58         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

theory,  no  doubt,  we  can  conceive  a  simultaneous 
appeal  to  working-class  sentiment  so  sudden,  so 
violent  and  so  widespread,  as  to  tear  the  weapon  of 
militarism  from  the  grasp  of  the  master-class  and  put 
it  at  the  service  of  a  proletarian  revolt.  But  practi- 
cally such  an  occurrence  is  most  improbable.  It 
presumes  a  combination  of  favouring  circumstances, 
external  and  psychological,  that  is  incredible.  The 
recent  Russian  revolution  does  not  contravene  this 
rule.  It  is  true  that  its  initial  success  was  attribut- 
able to  the  sympathy  and  co-operation  of  the  army 
with  the  civilian  insurrection.  But  this  was  rendered 
possible  only  by  a  violent  cleavage  in  the  classes 
wielding  power  and  property,  due  to  a  strange  and 
indeed  unprecedented  condition  in  the  evolution  of 
the  Russian  State — the  admission  to  high  place  in  the 
control  of  government  of  a  strong,  numerous  foreign 
element  belonging  to  that  very  State  with  which  the 
State  of  Russia  was  brought  into  conflict  by  the  play 
of  other  moulding  influences  in  her  policy.  When 
rogues  fall  out  honest  men  may  come  by  their  own. 
But  this  is  the  exception  that  proves  the  rule,  viz. 
that  the  classes  holding  political  power  and  property 
present  a  solid  front  to  the  attack  of  the  proletariat 
and  utilize  that  proletariat  as  a  military  force  against 
its  civil  movement. 

Militarism  thus  means,  in  the  first  place,  that  the 
propertied  classes  who  furnish  the  command,  possess 
and  are  aware  of  possessing  in  the  army  a  final  and 
sure  bulwark  of  defence  against  any  really  dangerous 
attack  upon  their  political  and  economic  power,  "  the 
interestocracy,"  either  in  the  way  of  mob  violence,  a 
withholding  of  their  labour  power,  or  constitutional 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   59 

reforms.  It  is  true  that,  even  in  Germany  and 
Russia,  this  use  of  militarism  has  normally  been  kept 
in  the  background.  But  both  the  ruling  and  the 
subject  classes  know  that  it  is  there,  and  despite  all 
the  devices  to  represent  militarism  as  a  defence  of 
the  Fatherland  against  the  foreign  foe,  some  recogni- 
tion of  this  deeper  purpose  continually  creeps  in. 
War  itself  serves,  of  course,  to  mask  this  domestic 
purpose  under  the  temporary  reality  of  national 
antagonism.  It  is  not  only  the  effect,  in  large  measure 
it  is  the  purpose.  This  has  been  partially  true  of 
Germany,  where  the  true  logic  of  militarism  has  worked 
more  nakedly  than  elsewhere.  German  conserva- 
tism, like  that  of  other  rich  countries,  is  more  closely 
and  even  consciously  engaged  in  the  defence  of 
property,  and  militarism  more  and  more  becomes  an 
instrument  in  this  defence.  The  rapidity  with  which 
Germany  has  entered  on  her  new  commercial  and 
industrial  career,  and  the  organized  skill  with  which 
the  sway  of  improperty  has  there  been  exercised, 
alike  in  industry  and  government,  have  ripened  the 
issue  more  completely  than  elsewhere. 

But  in  other  European  countries  the  same  lesson 
may  be  learnt.  That  Russian  militarism  was  developed 
by  the  autocracy  to  keep  down  the  Russian  people 
hardly  needs  argument.  It  is  not  seriously  disput- 
able in  view  of  the  events  of  1906.  The  army  has 
been  the  avowed  weapon  of  autocracy,  bureaucracy 
and  the  landed  and  commercial  interests,  against  the 
seething  tide  of  revolutionary  discontent,  and,  in 
spite  of  the  active  support  it  has  rendered  to  the 
upheaval  of  19 17,  will  be  pretty  certain  to  return  to 
its  allegiance  as  the  instrument  of  a  social  "  order  " 


60         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

interpreted  by  the  interest  of  the  classes  who  officer 
it  and  engineer  the  new  domestic  and  foreign  policy 
of  a  "  constitutional  "  Russia.  The  notion  that  the 
Russian  army  will  remain  the  faithful  ally  of  the 
Russian  democracy  is  a  childish  illusion  which  nobody 
familiar  with  history  can  entertain. 

Does  a  republican  form  of  government  furnish  a 
reliable  guarantee  that  the  interests  of  the  people 
shall  overbear  those  of  the  propertied  classes  ? 

Recent  events  have  brought  monarchy,  as  an  insti- 
tution, into  disrepute.  The  machinations  of  monarchs 
and  courts  have  been  exposed  as  working  havoc  with 
the  safety  and  welfare  of  their  peoples.  Nor  is  it 
absolutist  monarchy  alone  that  suffers  from  the 
revelation.  .  The  very  term  Constitutional  Monarchy 
is  everywhere  becoming  recognized  as  injurious  to  the 
cause  of  genuine  democracy.  The  incorporation  in 
a  government  of  the  hereditary  principle,  either  in 
the  head  of  the  State  or  a  Chamber  of  the  Legislature, 
is  a  defiance  of  reason  which  carries  with  it  grave 
intellectual  and  moral  damages. 

But  Republicanism  itself  forms  no  security  for 
democracy  or  against  militarism.  Has  the  case  of 
Republican  France  been  essentially  different  from 
that  of  autocratic  Russia  ?  What  has  been  the  mean- 
ing of  the  tightening  conscription  and  increasing 
military  expenditure  during  the  last  generation  ? 
The  conscious  and  avowed  motives,  defence  against 
another  German  invasion  or  la  revanche,  are  but  a 
partial  explanation.  Throughout  the  whole  illumin- 
ating Dreyfus  episode  another  meaning  of  the  army 
as  a  shield  of  property  and  of  its  legal  and  economic 
foundations,   against   the   revolutionary  proletariat, 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   61 

became  apparent.  In  France,  as  in  Germany,  mili- 
tary service  was  valued  primarily  by  the  ruling  and 
authoritative  classes,  first  as  a  wholesome  discipline 
for  the  workers,  and,  secondly,  as  an  ever  ready 
instrument  for  the  suppression  of  revolts  against 
servile  conditions  of  industry  and  the  powers  of  a 
bourgeois  bureaucratic  State.  The  crucial  instance 
of  this  motive  was  afforded  by  the  action  of  the 
Government  in  19 10  when  the  great  railway  strike 
was  broken  by  the  simple  expedient  of  placing  under 
military  discipline  all  the  railway  workers  who  were 
reservists  and  punishing  by  court-martial  all  who 
refused  obedience.  This  mode  of  strike-breaking 
brought  shattering  conviction  to  the  logical  French 
mind. 

But  how  is  all  this  applicable  to  British  militarism  ? 
it  may  be  asked.  That,  at  any  rate,  has  not  been 
inspired  by  domestic  fears.  Until  the  German  menace 
tardily  forced  itself  on  to  our  consciousness,  we  were 
content  with  plans  for  the  defence  of  our  dominions 
against  external  foes.  Our  small  military  system  had 
no  regard  to  the  defence  of  property  !  Now,  it  is 
true  that  British  militarism  has  come  with  a  rush  in 
war-time  and  bears  the  appearance  of  a  merely  tem- 
porary improvization.  But  those  who  have  more 
closely  watched  the  course  of  politics  in  recent  years 
will  form  a  different  judgment.  They  will  have  per- 
ceived a  steady,  widespread  and  various  campaign 
afoot  throughout  the  country  for  compulsory  military 
service,  in  which  all  the  Conservative  interests  of  the 
nation  were  actively  enlisted.  It  is  now  pretended 
that  the  promotors  of  this  movement,  gifted  beyond 
their  fellows  with  a  power  of  prophecy,  foresaw  u  the 


62         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

inevitable  war/'  and  were  merely  motived  by  the 
patriotic   desire   to   prepare   for   it.     Now,    for   our 
argument  it  is  immaterial  whether  the  war  was  or 
was  not  inevitable.     What  is  certain  is  that  very  few 
responsible  persons  of  any  party  or  class  seriously 
believed  in  its  inevitability  or  even  in  its  likelihood. 
A  good  many,  doubtless,  half  believed  in  it,  because 
they  wanted  conscription  and  found  it  easy  to  per- 
suade themselves  that  a  fear  so  obviously  serviceable 
to  secure  their  end  had  something  in  it.     A  few  even 
wanted  war  and  had  the  wit  to  recognize  that  if  they 
talked  loudly  and  confidently  of  its  inevitability,  it 
was  more  likely  that  their  prophecy  would  be  fulfilled. 
My  point  here  is  that,  if  we  look  to  the  trend  of  British 
politics  and  industr}?-  in  the  years  before  the  war,  we 
shall  see  the  same  drive  towards  militarism  that  we 
have  seen  in  France  and  Germany.     For  the  same 
impelling  motives  were  at  work.     And  the  first  of 
these  motives  is  that  a  strong  army  and  its  accom- 
paniment of  national  discipline  were  wanted  for  the 
defence  of  "  property."  For  "  property  "  was  seriously 
threatened.     The  working  classes  were  lately  showing 
new   capabilities    of   organization    both    in    politics 
and  industry.     The  two-party  system,  by  whose  see- 
saw the  propertied  classes  had  kept  securely  in  their 
hands  the  power  of  government,  was  breaking  down. 
A  new  growing  Labour  party  had  come  into  being. 
An  "effect  of  this  new  situation  was  to  strengthen  the 
leftjwing  of  Liberalism  and  to  drive  it  along  roads 
dangerous  to  property.     The  new  policy  of  social 
reform,  the  radical  concessions  intended  to  frustrate 
more  extreme  demands  of  labourism  and  socialism, 
themselves  involved  attacks  upon  the  rights  of  pro- 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   63 

perty  which  were  resented  as  confiscatory  and  revo- 
lutionary. It  was  not  any  theoretical  objection 
either  to  social  reforms  or  to  the  extension  of  State 
functions  which  accompanied  them  that  stirred  this 
new  spirit  of  resentment,  but  the  financial  policy 
which  they  involved.  It  was  the  great  Budget  of 
1909,  with  the  fresh  exactions  upon  property  evidently 
needed  to  appease  and  satisfy  the  popular  demands 
for  pensions,  insurance,  housing,  education  and  other 
expensive  policies,  that  rallied  property  to  its  defences. 
For  it  was  correctly  understood  that  the  costs  of  these 
reforms  must  come  out  of  the  purses  of  landlords, 
brewers,  City  men,  railway  and  shipping  magnates, 
and  the  directors  and  dividend  receivers  in  our  pros- 
perous industries  and  commerce.  And  these  were 
not  disposed  to  pay  if  they  could  help  it.  There  is 
no  tendency  among  the  Conservative  owning  classes 
to  recognize  that  "  rights  of  private  property/1  as 
at  present  exercised,  conflict  with  the  general  well- 
being,  or  contain  grievances  that  ought  to  be 
redressed.1 

1  So  intelligent  an  exponent  of  Conservatism  as  Lord  Hugh 
Cecil  fails  entirely  to  discover  any  distinction  between  legitimate 
and  illegitimate  forms  of  property.  "Our  survey  of  the  principles 
underlying  the  right  of  private  property,  and  the  relation  of  the 
State,  especially  in  its  function  of  tax-gatherer,  to  property,  leads 
to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  State  equitably  to 
distinguish  between  one  kind  of  property  and  another,  either  on 
the  principle  that  its  economic  value  is  earned  or  unearned,  or 
on  the  general  principle  that  it  has  been  acquired  more  or  less 
meritoriously.  All  property  appears  to  have  an  equal  claim  on 
the  respect  of  the  State,  and  neither  in  taxation  nor  in  any  other 
acts  of  State  can  distinctions  be  fairly  drawn  between  one  owner 
of  property  and  another." — "Conservatism,"  Home  University 
Library,  p.  150.  V 


64         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

The  new  forces  of  democracy,  therefore,  spelt 
anarchy  to  the  classes  conscious  of  their  right  to  own 
and  right  to  rule,  and  they  began  to  be  concerned  for 
their  defences.  The  instinct  of  rightful  rulership  had 
never  been  abandoned  by  the  master-class  :  it  had 
always  been  sustained  by  a  very  real  predominance 
in  politics,  in  business  and  in  society,  and  consecrated 
by  the  deference  paid  by  the  lower  classes  to  those 
whom  they  recognized  as  their  "  betters."  Even 
under  a  popular  franchise,  manipulated  by  the  well- 
to-do,  this  predominance  remained  unshaken.  But 
now  that  the  electorate  began  to  get  out  of  hand,  and 
really  dangerous  proposals  forced  themselves  into 
practical  politics,  while  the  House  of  Lords,  an  ever- 
present  help  in  time  of  trouble,  was  robbed  of  its 
veto,  the  Constitutional  party  began  to  look  behind 
the  Constitution  that  was  failing  them  for  some 
more  reliable  support.  Nor  was  it  only  the  political 
situation  that  was  menacing.  Organized  labour 
was  becoming  more  restive  in  all  parts  of  the 
industrial  world.  Europe  was  boiling  over  with 
great  labour  conflicts.  The  virtual  stoppage  of 
the  rise  in  wages,  which  had  for  a  generation 
past  bought  off  the  proletariat  revolt  in  this 
country,  blasted  the  hopes  of  the  wage-earners  and 
produced  a  seething  discontent  which  vented  itself 
in  strikes  of  a  scope  and  intensity  beyond  all 
precedent. 

These  conditions  were  compelling  the  ruling  classes 
to  look  behind  the  Law  and  the  Constitution  to  the 
army  for  the  protection  of  their  property,  their  power 
and  their  privileges.  Militarism  became  a  conscious 
need.     Soldiers    might    be    wanted    to    quell    strike 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY    65 

violence,1  to  protect  blackleg  labour,  to  compel  the 
working  of  the  railways  and  the  mines,  and  in  the 
last  resort  to  resist  the  administration  of  laws  of  a 
confiscatory  or  revolutionary  character  passed  by  a 
Parliament  in  a  spirit  of  recklessness  or  panic  !  With 
that  curious  indirectness  which  obscures  our  politics, 
the  test  and  proof  of  this  interpretation  is  found,  not 
directly  in  the  economic  field  but  in  a  heated  constitu- 
tional issue.  In  the  treason  of  Ulster  and  the  flash- 
light of  the  Curragh  Camp  and  the  reception  of  these 
acts  in  England,  far  more  than  in  the  fear  of  Germany, 
we  find  the  meaning  of  militarism.  High  party 
leaders  in  this  country,  with  a  great  following  in  the 
political  and  social  world,  flaunted  their  intention  to 
resist  the  will  of  Parliament  by  appealing  to  the 
army.*  Thus  the  threatened  interests  of  property 
found  their  opportunity.  Had  the  war  not  intervened, 
the  matter  would  have  gone  forward,  and  the  exhibi- 
tion of  the  meaning  of  militarism  as  an  instrument  of 
Conservatism  would  have  been  complete.  Property, 
in  open  alliance  with  organized  illegal  force,  would 
have  fought  to  recover  the  constitutional  positions 
it  had  lost,  and  would  have  firmly  entrenched  itself 
against  future  assaults  of  the  people,  either  in  their 
capacity  of  an  electorate  or  an  industrial  proletariat. 
The  absorbing  importance  of  the  war  has  wiped  out 
of  memory  the  situation  which  was  evolving  so  swiftly 

1  In  the  great  railway  strike  of  191 1  Mr.  Winston  Churchill, 
Home  Secretary,  secured  the  use  of  the  military  and  placed  it  at 
the  disposal  of  the  railway  directors. 

■  For  a  fuller  analysis  of  the  situation  in  the  early  summer  of 
1914,  I  may  refer  readers  to  my  pamphlet  "Traffic  in  Treason" 
(Fisher  Unwin). 

5 


66         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

in  the  years  before.  But  the  deeper  factors  of  that 
situation  will  remain  and  will  reassert  themselves. 
Militarism  will  have  been  firmly  fastened  on  this 
country,  and  its  beneficiaries  will  struggle  stoutly 
against  any  attempts  to  remove  or  weaken  it. 

The  emergency  powers  of  militarism  during  the  war 
exhibit  various  ways  in  which  National  Service,  in 
time  of  peace,  may  be  utilized  for  the  defence  of 
capitalism.  The  Defence  of  the  Realm  Act  and  the 
Military  Service  Act  between  them  possess  immense 
potentialities  of  industrial  compulsion,  gradually 
realized  as  the  war  advanced.  Here  are  two  instances 
among  many  : — 

Within  a  month  of  the  passing  of  the  Military  Service 
Act  there  was  a  strike  at  Dundee.  .  .  .  What  did  the 
employer  do  ?  He  did  not  use  the  ordinary  methods  of 
dispute  and  fight  it  out.  .  .  .  He  immediately  reported 
these  men  to  the  military  authorities  and  they  were  called 
up  under  the  Act.1 

A  working  party  of  120  soldiers  was  supplied  to  the 
Llanelly  Steel  Company.  These  men  remain  in  the 
military  service  of  the  Crown  and  are  under  military 
discipline.  They  receive  no  wages,  but  continue  in 
receipt  of  their  military  emoluments.2 

Readers  of  the  franker  organs  of  the  Conservative 
Press  have  no  illusions  about  the  phrase  "  duration 
of  the  war."  They  know  that  militarism  is  intended 
to  stay,  and  that  its  beneficent  influence,  like  that  of 
charity,  "  begins  at  home." 

1  J.  H.  Thomas,  House  of  Commons,  May  16,  1916. 
3  Dr.  Addison,   Ministry  of   Munitions,  House  of  Commons, 
August  7,  1916. 


THE  DEFENCE  OF  IMPROPERTY   67 

Trade  Unionism — that  shelter  for  slinking  shirkers — is 
imperilling  our  existence,  and  by  its  action  a  rot  of  our 
national  soul  has  set  in.  One  remedy,  and  one  alone,  can 
eradicate  this  state  of  rot — martial  law  will  cure  it.1 

Compulsory  service  was  necessary  at  this  time  when  the 
people  were  getting  out  of  hand.* 

Here  we  hear  the  master's  voice.  It  merely  gives 
expression  to  a  sentiment  which  is  commonly  known 
to  pervade  large  sections  of  "  society/'  including  not 
only  the  aristocracy  and  the  plutocracy,  but  con- 
siderable strata  of  the  managerial,  the  official  and  the 
professional  classes  of  this  and  other  countries. 

1  Lieut.-Colonel  W.  H.Maxwell  in  The  Outlook,  September  1915. 
a  Colonel  Sir  Augustus  FitzGeorge,  August  26,  191 5. 


CHAPTER   IV 
PROTECTIONISM   AND   IMPERIALISM 


So  far  our  analysis  has  been  mainly  concerned  with 
the  part  played  by  militarism  as  a  conservative  and 
reactionary  factor  in  the  internal  policy  of  a  modern 
State,  directed  to  safeguard  the  status  and  interests 
of  the  ruling  and  possessing  classes.  In  turning  now 
to  the  consideration  of  militarism  and  navalism  as 
factors  in  the  foreign  policy  of  such  a  State,  I  must 
again  repeat  the  warning  against  the  disposition  to 
exaggerate  the  consciously  purposive  character  of  the 
economic  motives.  In  dealing,  for  example,  with  the 
Imperialism  of  our  own  or  another  State,  we  need  not 
take  that  purely  cynical  view  of  the  relations  between 
the  missionary,  the  soldier,  the  ruler  and  the  trader 
which  represents  the  three  former  as  the  conscious 
or  unconscious  tools  of  the  last.  Although,  as  we 
recognize,  the  more  humane  and  disinterested  motives 
are  often  used  as  masks  by  the  more  selfish  motives 
of  business  men  or  rulers,  this  does  not  dispose  of 
them  as  contributory  and  modifying  influences  in  the 
operations.  Nor  is  it  wise  to  treat  the  "  masking  " 
process  itself  as  a  mere  example  of  hypocrisy.  In 
most  cases  it  is  as  unconscious  and  instinctive  as  the 

68 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    69 

protective  devices  by  which  many  species  of  animals 
or  vegetables  take  advantage  of  the  colouring  or  other 
serviceable  features  of  their  immediate  environment 
to  conceal  them  against  enemies,  or  to  enable  them 
to  approach  their  prey  undetected.  Nor,  in  distin- 
guishing the  two  main  directive  motives,  power  and 
property,  which  really  dominate  the  external  policy 
of  States,  need  we  regard  the  statesmen  and  officials 
who  directly  represent  "  power  "  as  either  catspaws 
or  conscious  confederates  of  the  trading  and  financial 
interests  which  stand  for  "  property."  On  the  con- 
trary, in  dealing  with  extensions  of  national  territory, 
it  may  generally  be  assumed  that  the  conception  of 
national  greatness  in  terms  of  area  and  population 
has  a  conscious  and  powerful  appeal  to  the  sentiments 
not  only  of  statesmen  but  of  peoples,  and  that  that 
appeal  is  by  no  means  devoid  of  finer  and  humaner 
feelings. 

Successful  conquest  brings  kudos  to  politicians  and 
generals  and  feeds  the  sentiment  of  power  in  the 
general  body  of  the  nation.  But  with  this  lust  for 
power  and  acquisition  mingle  other  motives,  half 
real,  half  feigned,  the  anxiety  to  defend  existing 
frontiers,  to  put  down  disorder,  to  punish  wrong-doing 
and  in  general  to  extend  the  area  of  civilized  govern- 
ment. The  ambitions  of  traders,  concession-hunters 
and  financiers  are  not  wholly  hidden  from  the 
statesmen  and  officials  who  carry  out  the  policy. 
Sometimes  the  coalition  of  business  and  politics  may 
be  very  close,  as  for  example  in  the  Jameson  Raid. 
But  the  volume  of  popular  support  for  such  a  policy 
is  commonly  free  from  any  conscious  economic  motive. 
It  is  also  sentimentalized  by  the  politicians  and  the 


70         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

business  men  who  are  directing  it,  and  who  require 
"  the  great  heart  of  the  people  "  to  respond  to  their 
appeal.  I  need  not  do  more  than  allude  to  the  devices 
commonly  adopted  to  win  the  volume  of  popular 
support.  It  need  not  be  a  fabricated  device,  it  may 
be  a  real  incident  seized  and  utilized  to  inflame 
passions.  ';  Women  and  children  in  danger,"  an 
insult  to  the  flag,  the  murder  of  a  missionary,  some 
stoppage  of  a  right  of  way,  have  served  the  purpose. 
The  sentiment  aroused  is  not  confined  to  a  demand 
for  protection,  redress  and  punishment.  The  people 
who  do  such  things  are  not  fit  to  govern  themselves ; 
it  is  the  right,  nay  the  bounden  duty,  of  a  civilized 
State  to  take  them  under  its  tutelage  !  And  who  so 
fit  to  perform  this  task  as  we,  with  our  "  genius  for 
government,"  our  superior  kultur,  our  experience  in 
the  management  of  backward  peoples  ?  So  argues, 
so  feels  each  of  the  imperially  minded  peoples.  There 
is  no  reason  to  deny  the  genuineness  or  the  intensity 
of  these  feelings.  But  it  is  quite  evident  that  the 
part  they  play  in  determining  the  concrete  steps  that 
constitute  Imperialism  is  almost  negligible.  They 
are  needed  and  utilized  so  as  to  give  the  moral  and 
material  support  which  empire-makers  require.  Now, 
empire-makers  are  mainly  motived  by  the  will  to 
power.  They  seek  power  for  themselves  or  for  their 
country,  or  for  both.  This  brings  us  a  step  nearer  to 
the  really  vital  point,  that  of  discovering  the  relation 
of  definitely  economic  motives  to  other  motives 
primarily  political  in  the  processes  of  Imperialism. 
We  have  already  accepted  as  a  working  hypothesis 
the  statement  that  the  will  to  power  is  the  central 
operative   motive   in   actual   politics,    especially   in 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    71 

foreign  policy.  Further,  we  have  recognized  that 
the  chief  instrument  by  which  men  realize  the  will  to 
power  in  modern  times  is  surplus  property,  that  is, 
the  property  which  they  can  get  over  and  above  what 
is  required  to  satisfy  the  will  to  live  in  its  narrower 
significance.  We  shall,  therefore,  expect  to  find 
capitalism,  which  breeds  this  surplus,  playing  an  ever 
larger  part  in  Imperialism  and  foreign  policy.  This 
should  be  especially  apparent  in  States  where  industry 
and  commerce  are  most  advanced  or  are  most  rapidly 
advancing.  For  in  these  States  the  ruling  classes  are 
most  permeated  by  the  modern  spirit  of  economic 
enterprise  and  most  apt  to  use  all  powers  of  govern- 
ment for  the  furtherance  of  directly  economic  ends. 
But  even  here  we  should  be  careful  to  make  due 
allowance  for  the  survival  of  powerful  non-economic 
motives  in  foreign  policy. 

It  is  when  we  concentrate  upon  that  large  and 
critical  section  of  foreign  policy  which  expresses  the 
conflicting  aims  and  ambitions  of  powerful  modern 
States  with  growing  populations  and  with  growing 
commercial  and  financial  intercourse  with  the  Govern- 
ments and  peoples  of  foreign  countries,  that  we  realize 
the  inherent  soundness  of  the  economic  interpretation. 
For  in  the  relations  of  the  modern  States,  both  with 
one  another  and  with  the  less  developed  countries, 
we  find  that  the  differences  and  difficulties  which 
ripen  into  quarrels  are  more  and  more  concerned  with 
matters  of  trade,  finance  and  economic  exploitation. 
Now,  it  is  important  clearly  to  understand  why  this 
is  the  case.  For  the  general  principles  of  commercial 
and  financial  intercourse  do  not  furnish  an  explana- 
tion.   They  present  the  picture  of  an  ever- widening 


72  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

process  of  mutually  gainful  co-operation  by  which 
the  peoples  of  different  countries  share  their  national 
advantages  of  natural  resources,  skill  and  industry 
with  one  another,  and  work  together  for  ends  which, 
though  directly  selfish  and  competitive,  are  harmon- 
ized in  the  wider  economic  scheme.  In  order  to 
understand  how  economic  divergencies  of  interests 
arise,  strong  enough  and  persistent  enough  to  motive 
militarism  and  to  sow  the  seeds  of  wars,  we  require 
to  explore  a  little  closely  the  nature  of  the  economic 
oppositions  which  find  vent  in  foreign  policy. 

The  two  chief  modes  or  policies  by  which  this 
economic  opposition  between  States  is  expressed, 
Protection,  the  refusal  of  free  entrance  to  home 
markets,  and  Imperialism,  the  forcible  acquisition  of 
foreign  markets,  concessions,  areas  of  development 
and  government,  seem  at  first  sight  to  contravene  the 
first  principles  of  economic  utility.  In  the  simple 
logic  of  free  exchange  and  of  the  co-operation  based 
on  it,  political  barriers  are  merely  irrelevant.  If  it 
is  materially  gainful  for  two  persons,  A  and  B,  to 
exchange  with  one  another  certain  kinds  of  goods  in 
which  each  possesses  some  advantage  of  soil,  position, 
skill  or  other  opportunity,  what  can  it  matter  whether 
A  and  B  both  live  under  the  same  Government  or 
under  different  Governments  ?  Or  again,  if  A  and  B, 
living  under  different  Governments,  find  it  better  to 
exchange  their  surplus  goods  with  C,  D  or  any  other 
person  living  under  another  Government,  what 
possible  advantage  can  there  be  in  any  of  these 
Governments  interfering  so  as  to  enable  or  compel 
their  subject  to  exchange  his  goods  with  one  foreigner 
rather  than  another  ?     Or,  finally,  if  A  and  B  have 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    73 

both  made  savings  and  want  to  lend  them  for  interest 
or  profit  to  C  or  D  in  other  countries,  in  order  to  get 
gain  by  developing*  these  countries,  what  interest  or 
business  can  A's  or  B's  Government  have  in  trying  to 
bring  pressure  upon  C  to  borrow  from  A  rather  than 
B,  or  B  rather  than  A  ?  According  to  economic 
logic  any  such  governmental  interference  in  any  of 
these  cases  is  injurious,  not  merely  to  the  interest  of 
the  world-community  to  which  A,  B,  C  and  D  all 
belong,  but  also  to  the  narrower  political  group  or 
nation  whose  Government  interferes.  It  cannot,  it 
appears,  really  be  to  the  advantage  of  A's  nation  for 
A's  Government  to  coerce  him  into  selling  to  or  buying 
from  E,  because  E  is  a  member  of  A's  nation,  rather 
than  from  C,  a  foreigner,  by  dealing  with  whom  A  can 
get  a  greater  gain.  Though  E  may  gain  from  the 
act  of  coercion,  A  will  lose,  and  A's  loss  will  in  normal 
circumstances  be  greater  than  E's,  so  that  the  group 
to  which  A  and  E  belong  will  be  poorer,  apart  from 
the  trouble  and  expense  involved  in  the  act  of 
interference. 

What,  then,  is  the  reason  why  States  have  refused 
to  found  their  policy  of  commerce  upon  this  convincing 
logic  ?  Why  do  most  of  the  dangerous  disputes 
between  modern  Governments  rest  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  they  can  increase  the  aggregate  wealth 
or  property  of  their  respective  nations  by  forcible 
interferences  with  the  flow  of  trade  and  of  capital  ? 

Are  Protection  and  economic  Imperialism  merely 
belated  survivals  of  an  antiquated  statecraft  based 
upon  erroneous  notions  of  the  functions  of  a  State 
(a)  in  regulating  the  use  of  the  natural  and  human 
resources  of  a  country  for  industry  and  commerce  so 


74  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

as  to  make  it  strong  for  competition  with  other 
countries,  (b)  in  treating  colonies  or  other  overseas 
possessions  as  estates  to  be  worked  for  the  industrial, 
commercial  and  financial  gain  of  the  colonizing 
country  ?  This  mercantilist  theory,  which  came  into 
prominence  as  the  economic  policy  of  nationalism 
so  soon  as  central  national  government  was  firmly 
established  in  this  country,  was  the  guiding  principle 
in  our  policy  during  the  sixteenth,  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries.  Though  the  American  Revolu- 
tion struck  a  mortal  blow  at  mercantile  colonization, 
while  the  Free  Trade  policy  of  Peel  and  Cobden  seemed 
to  make  a  final  renunciation  of  State  regulation  of 
external  trade,  mercantilism  has  never  been  com- 
pletely extirpated  from  our  theory  of  government, 
or  even  from  our  practices.  The  recent  Protectionist 
campaign  shows  what  strong  roots  the  notion  of  this 
isolated  or  self-sufficient  economic  State  still  retains 
in  the  general  mind,  together  with  the  conviction  that 
State  policy  can  advantageously  be  applied  to  safe- 
guard the  interests  of  our  people  against  the  conflict- 
ing interests  of  other  peoples.  A  striking  recrudes- 
cence of  mercantile  colonization  is  seen  in  the  recent 
order  of  the  Colonial  Office  placing  a  prohibitive 
export  duty  upon  palm  kernels  exported  to  any  other 
country  than  Great  Britain  and  her  Empire. 

That  modern  Continental  States  have  clung  to  and 
extended  the  doctrines  of  mercantilism  is,  of  course, 
notorious.  All  the  great  Powers  are  Protectionist 
in  their  home  fiscal  policy :  all,  with  the  exception 
of  Germany,  adopt  in  various  measures  the  mercantile 
or  "  estate  "  view  of  colonies.  Moreover,  the  new 
Powers  are  at  once  impregnated  with  the  same  policies. 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    75 

The  United  States  and  Japan,  together  with  our  own 
self-governing  Dominions,  are  essentially  mercantilist 
in  their  fiscal  and  colonial  practices. 

Disregarding  altogether  the  plain  logic  and  utility 
of  free  exchange,  all  declare  for  a  State  which,  by 
regulations  and  restraints  in  commerce,  can  increase 
the  prosperity  of  its  people  and  secure  for  them 
their  "  proper  "  share  of  the  trade  and  profitable 
exploitation  of  the  earth  in  competition  with  the 
people  of  other  States.  Protectionism  and  colonial- 
ism thus  hold  the  field  in  world  politics.  And,  what 
is  more,  historians  and  economic  theorists  commonly 
ascribe  the  rise  and  success  of  Britain's  commercial 
prosperity  to  these  practices.  It  is  hardly  too  much 
to  say  that  this  grotesque  misreading  of  British 
history  by  the  educated  German  public  has  been  a 
necessary  factor  in  the  making  of  this  world-war. 
Here  is  the  judgment  of  so  learned  and  so  moderate- 
minded  a  man  as  Schmoller  : — 

England  reached  the  summit  of  its  commercial  pros- 
perity by  means  of  its  tariffs  and  naval  wars,  frequently 
with  extraordinary  violence  and  always  with  the  most 
tenacious  national  selfishness. 

I  append  the  comment  of  Mr.  Conrad  Gill x  upon 
this  extraordinary  judgment : — 

So  we  are  asked  to  believe  that  the  work  of  Boulton 
and  Watt  and  Wedgwood,  the  invention  of  the  mule  and 
the   power-loom,  the   extending  of   credit  and   banking, 

1  "National  Power  and  Prosperity"  (Fisher  Unwin),  p.  28. 
Mr.  Gill's  volume  is  a  most  timely  and  incisive  inquiry  into  the 
nature  of  mercantilism  and  its  survivals  in  modern  policy. 


76         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

the  accumulation  of  capital  and  the  growth  of  joint-stock 
enterprise,  the  establishment  of  factories,  the  construction 
of  roads,  canals  and  railways,  the  improvement  of  agricul- 
ture, and  all  else  that  is  implied  in  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion— that  all  this  was  due,  not  to  the  enterprise  of  inventors 
and  organizers,  but  primarily  to  policy,  to  a  tariff,  one  of 
the  most  absurd  and  onerous  ever  known,  and  to  success 
in  warfare. 

But,  if  it  be  so  easily  demonstrable  that  Protec- 
tionism and  economic  Imperialism  are  based  upon 
complete  misconceptions  of  the  nature  of  commerce 
and  of  what  a  State  can  do  by  the  use  of  its  power  to 
increase  the  prosperity  of  its  subjects,  it  yet  remains 
to  be  explained  why  these  misconceptions  retain 
their  places  in  statecraft,  and  why  fairly  reasonable 
and  intelligent  statesmen  continue  to  apply  them  in 
policy. 

The  explanation  lies  in  the  opposition  between  the 
interests  of  certain  classes  within  each  nation  and  the 
welfare  of  the  nation  as  a  whole,  and  in  the  ability 
of  these  classes  to  impose  their  class  interests  upon 
the  statecraft  of  their  country.  Protection  is  a  bad 
policy  for  a  nation.  It  diminishes  its  total  output 
of  wealth,  distributes  it  unfairly,  imposes  a  secret, 
onerous  and  wasteful  method  of  taxation,  breeds 
political  corruption,  establishes  monopolies,  and  pro- 
vokes ill-will  and  quarrels  with  other  nations.  But 
it  is  a  good  policy  for  capitalists  in  certain  well- 
organized  industries,  who  by  their  political  pressure 
can  frame  a  tariff  that  enables  them  to  raise  their 
prices  and  increase  their  profits  at  the  expense  of 
weaker  industries  and  the  consuming  public.  A  part 
of  the  illicit  profits  which  it  yields  can  be  applied  to 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    77 

maintaining  and  enforcing  the  political  pull  and  to 
spreading  a  propaganda  representing  Protection  as 
a  sound  national  and  imperial  policy.  The  ill-will 
which  tariffs  beget  in  surrounding  nations  and  the 
reprisals  they  evoke  go  to  feed  the  delusion  that  trade 
is  fundamentally  a  form  of  competition,  not  of  co- 
operation, and  that  nations  are  hostile  competitors. 
The  diplomatic  and  sometimes  the  military  conflicts 
which  ensue  from  tariff  wars  confirm  this  delusion. 
So  Protection  passes  from  the  position  of  an  un- 
scrupulous scheme  of  class  plunder  into  that  of 
a  patriotic  public  policy.  Finally,  given  favouring 
circumstances,  it  can  be  riveted  upon  the  State  as 
a  political  and  military  necessity.  For  States  which 
stop  the  natural  courses  of  trade  with  neighbours, 
cripple  their  development,  "  steal "  their  markets 
and  otherwise  inflict  economic  injuries,  live  in  fear 
lest  the  injured  interests  in  these  neighbour  States 
may  be  strong  enough  to  coerce  their  Governments 
into  forcible  intervention.  Given  a  group  of  powerful 
States,  each  controlled  in  its  fiscal  and  its  foreign 
policy  by  strong  business  interests,  it  is  easy  to  per- 
ceive that  a  generally  dangerous  situation  emerges. 
Each  State,  considering  the  possibility  of  invasion 
on  the  part  of  a  foreign  Power  or  group  of  Powers, 
must  look  not  merely  to  its  forcible  but  to  its  economic 
defences.  So  a  "  national  economy  "  of  industrial, 
agricultural  and  commercial  self-sufficiency  assumes 
the  guise  of  a  vital  policy,  and  permanent  Protec- 
tionism is  established  as  its  chief  instrument.  Under 
these  conditions  Protection  becomes  an  essential 
feature  of  national  defence,  an  economic  militarism. 


78         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

II 

But  the  fuller  nature  of  this  conspiracy  of  vested 
interests  against  the  Commonwealth  is  seen  in  the 
economic  interpretation  of  Imperialism.  Just  as 
Protection  originates  in  the  desire  of  certain  strong 
capitalistic  industries  to  increase  their  private  profits 
at  the  expense  of  the  community  by  securing  a  mono- 
poly of  the  home  markets,  so  Imperialism  originates 
in  a  desire  of  the  same  business  interests  to  extend 
their  gains  by  bringing  under  their  national  flag  new 
territorial  areas  for  profitable  commerce  and  invest- 
ment. They  are  under  a  powerful  economic  pressure 
to  fasten  on  their  Government  this  pushful  foreign 
policy.  For  the  large  profits  and  high  incomes  drawn 
by  the  capitalistic  and  organizing  classes  in  the  great 
staple  branches  of  industry  and  commerce  involve  a 
restriction  of  the  home  market  and  a  consequent 
inability  to  find  profitable  employment  for  their  large 
accumulations  of  savings.  Where  the  product  of 
industry  and  commerce  is  so  divided  that  wages  are 
low  while  profits,  interest,  rent  are  relatively  high,  the 
small  purchasing  power  of  the  masses  sets  a  limit  on 
the  home  market  for  most  staple  commodities.  For 
a  comparatively  small  proportion  of  the  well-to-do 
incomes,  into  which  profits,  interests,  rents  enter,  is 
expended  in  demand  for  such  commodities.  The 
staple  manufactures  therefore,  working  with  modern 
mechanical  methods  that  continually  increase  the 
pace  of  output,  are  in  every  country  compelled  to 
look  more  and  more  to  export  trade,  and  to  hustle 
and  compete  for  markets  in  the  backward  countries 
of  the  world.    So  long  as  Britain  was  the  workshop 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    79 

of  the  world,  the  full  significance  of  this  commercial 
competition  did  not  appear.  The  world-market 
seemed  to  the  Lancashire  and  Birmingham  exporters 
of  the  early  nineteenth  century  illimitable.  But  the 
last  quarter  of  the  century  marked  a  rapid  change. 
New  nations  had  entered  the  career  of  industrial  and 
commercial  capitalism,  and  were  invading  the  export 
markets  of  which  we  held  possession,  and  were  open- 
ing up  or  competing  with  one  another  for  new  markets. 
In  each  nation  the  home  market  had  been  found 
inadequate  to  take  off  the  growing  output,  so  that 
foreign  outlets  must  be  found  or  forced.  Now,  there 
is  nothing  in  the  general  theory  of  trade  to  explain 
the  situation  which  then  emerged.  Since  all  commerce 
is  eventually  exchange  of  goods  against  goods,  markets 
ought  to  be  illimitable  as  the  wants  of  man.  But 
just  as  the  manufacturers  and  traders  of  each  nation 
found  their  home  markets  limited,  so  they  found  the 
world-market  also  limited  in  the  rate  and  pace  of  its 
expansion.  In  other  words,  the  maximum  output 
of  the  mines,  mills  and  workshops  in  Britain,  Germany, 
Belgium,  France,  the  United  States,  etc.,  appeared 
to  exceed  not  merely  the  demand  of  the  home  markets, 
but  of  the  immediately  available  and  profitable 
world-market.  Nor  is  it  really  surprising  that  this 
should  be  so.  For  just  as  the  home  market  was 
restricted  by  a  distribution  of  wealth  which  left  the 
mass  of  the  people  with  inadequate  power  to  purchase 
and  consume,  while  the  minority  who  had  the  purchas- 
ing power  either  wanted  to  use  it  in  other  ways,  or 
to  save  it  and  apply  it  to  an  increased  production 
which  still  further  congested  the  home  markets,  so 
likewise  with  the  world-market.     The  profits  of  the 


So         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

foreign  trade  and  of  the  foreign  industries  which  it 
sustained  were  distributed  so  unequally,  and  the 
gains  to  the  masses  of  the  peoples  in  the  newly 
developed  countries  were  relatively  so  small,  that  the 
same  incapacity  to  purchase  for  consumption  the 
whole  volume  of  exported  goods  competing  for  sale 
was  exhibited. 

Closely  linked  with  this  practical  limitation  of  the 
expansion  of  markets  for  goods  is  the  limitation  of 
profitable  fields  of  investment.  The  limitation  of 
home  markets  implies  a  corresponding  limitation  in 
the  investment  of  fresh  capital  in  the  trades  supplying 
these  markets.  This  limitation  of  investment  is 
not  wholly  removed  if,  as  we  see,  the  expansion  of 
foreign  markets  for  the  same  trade  is  also  limited. 
So  it  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  the  demand  for  new 
capital  for  investment  at  home  will  absorb  a  smaller 
and  smaller  proportion  of  the  whole  volume  of  new 
capital  which  the  wealthy  saving  classes  will  bring 
into  existence.  Putting  the  case  concretely,  only  a 
limited  proportion  of  the  savings  made  by  the  capital- 
ists in  the  textile  trades  of  this  country  can  be  profit- 
ably absorbed  in  normal  times  in  putting  up  more 
textile  plant,  either  for  supplying  the  home  market 
or  for  world  trade.  And  what  is  true  of  textiles  will 
be  true  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  savings  made  from 
trade  and  industry.  An  increasing  proportion  of 
such  savings  must  seek  other  investments.  Now,  it 
is  not  necessary  here  to  discuss  the  delicate  economic 
issue,  whether  it  can  rightly  be  maintained  that  there 
is  any  rigid  limit  to  the  quantity  of  new  capital  which 
can  be  absorbed  in  a  modern  country  with  all  sorts  of 
growing  and  potential  wants  and  with  indefinitely 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    81 

large  improvements  in  the  structure  of  industry. 
It  is  sufficient  for  our  argument  to  affirm  that,  in 
fact,  a  growing  tendency  for  new  capital  to  seek  and 
find  more  lucrative  employment  overseas  has  been 
exhibited.  The  financial  and  investing  classes  of 
every  developed  industrial  nation  have  within  the 
last  generation  been  sending  an  increasing  proportion 
of  their  ever-growing  savings  into  backward  countries. 
Now,  though  the  work  remaining  to  be  done  by 
capital  in  developing  the  resources  of  the  world  is 
practically  infinite,  at  any  given  time  the  quantity 
of  reasonably  safe  and  profitable  openings  is  limited. 
Thus  there  emerges  the  same  pressure  upon  available 
opportunities  for  foreign  investment  that  appears 
in  the  case  of  foreign  markets.  The  supply  of  com- 
peting capital  from  different  investing  countries 
shows  the  same  tendency  to  exceed  the  effective 
demand  as  in  the  case  of  ordinary  foreign  trade. 

Indeed,  so  far  as  appearances  go,  there  is  nothing 
to  distinguish  the  investment  of  capital  abroad  from 
ordinary  export  trade.  For  every  loan,  whether  to 
a  foreign  monarch  for  his  private  extravagances,  to 
a  Government  to  enable  it  to  buy  warships  or  to  make 
harbours,  to  a  syndicate  for  railroad  purposes,  or  to 
an  industrial  company  in  order  to  set  up  steel  mills 
or  textile  factories,  must  take  the  form  of  an  order 
for  goods  of  some  sort  which  are  at  the  disposal  of 
the  investor,  and  which  ordinarily  consist  of  goods 
made  in  the  country  where  the  investor  lives  and 
does  his  business.  If  English  investors  find  money 
for  a  new  railway  in  the  Argentine  or  Brazil,  that 
investment  acts  as  a  demand  for  English  goods  which, 
as  they  pass  out  of  this  country,  rank  as  so  much 

6 


82         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

export  trade.  This  is  quite  obvious  when,  as  is 
common  in  French  and  German  foreign  contracts, 
it  is  made  a  condition  that  the  foreign  railway,  or 
other  company,  shall  take  out  the  whole  or  a  large 
part  of  the  loan  in  French  or  German  rails,  engines  or 
other  stores.  But,  though  less  obvious,  it  is  equally 
true  when  no  such  condition  is  made.  If  the  money 
which  English  investors  supply  to  an  Argentine 
railway  is  directly  expended  in  purchasing  American 
rails  and  engines,  the  monetary  operation  compels 
the  Americans  or  some  other  foreigners  to  buy  English 
goods  which  otherwise  they  would  not  have  bought. 
In  other  words,  an  investment  of  English  capital 
abroad  is  in  substance  nothing  else  than  an  order  for 
English  goods,  which  must  go  out  either  to  the 
borrowing  country,  or  to  some  other  with  which  it 
has  commercial  dealings,  in  fulfilment  of  the  order. 
But  the  identity  between  export  trade  and  foreign 
investment  in  the  first  instance  does  not  affect  the 
important  distinction  between  the  two  processes  in 
their  subsequent  career.  The  interest  of  the  ordinary 
exporter  in  the  country  where  he  finds  a  market  for 
his  goods  is  limited  to  the  consideration  of  the  immedi- 
ate gain  he  makes  upon  the  goods  he  has  sold  and  the 
hopes  of  further  gains  from  future  sales.  This  foreign 
market  means  something  to  him,  and  the  good  govern- 
ment and  prosperity  of  the  people  in  the  foreign 
country  are  of  some  concern  to  him.  If  any  serious 
trouble  arises  in  the  country  which  threatens  to 
destroy  his  profitable  market,  or  if  some  other  Govern- 
ment tries  to  bring  pressure  to  get  away  his  market 
for  their  traders,  he  will  try  to  get  his  Government  to 
protect  his  interests.     So  the  interests  of  groups  of 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    83 

traders  have  played  a  considerable  and  a  growing 
part  in  foreign  policy,  and  the  desire  to  acquire, 
preserve  and  improve  foreign  markets,  especially  in 
backward  and  ill-governed  countries,  has  been  a 
distinct  and  powerful  motive  in  Imperialism.  But 
after  all,  the  stake  which  traders  have  in  a  foreign 
market  is  not  nearly  so  great  as  that  of  investors^ 
If  traders  fail  to  sell  their  wares  in  one  market  they 
can  sell  them,  though  perhaps  less  advantageously, 
in  another.  It  is  different  for  those  who  have  invested 
their  capital  in  a  foreign  country.  They  are  in  effect 
the  owners  of  a  portion  of  that  country,  they  have  a 
lien  upon  its  railways,  its  land,  plant,  buildings,  mines 
or  other  immovable  property.  Their  stake  is  a  fixed 
and  lasting  one,  it  is  bound  up  with  the  general 
prosperity  or  failure  of  the  country.  Their  economic 
interest  in  that  foreign  country  may  be  as  great  as  or 
greater  than  in  their  own,  and  what  happens  for  good 
or  evil  in  that  country  may  be  more  important  to 
them  than  anything  likely  to  happen  in  their  own. 
If,  therefore,  any  action  of  their  Government,  any 
stroke  of  foreign  policy,  can  improve  the  security  of 
that  distant  country,  it  improves  their  securities, 
and  even  if  a  threat  of  war  or  an  act  of  war  is  needed 
to  obtain  that  object,  what  matter  ?  The  people 
pay  the  cost  with  their  lives  and  their  money,  the 
investor  and  the  financier  reap  the  gain.  What  was 
said  by  a  British  statesman  in  a  moment  of  illumina- 
tion in  the  early  stage  of  our  absorption  of  Egypt, 
"  The  trail  of  finance  is  over  it  all,"  is  applicable  to 
most  modern  instances  of  Imperialism.  Not  only  is 
the  stake  of  the  financier  and  the  investor  greater  than 
that  of  the  mere  trader,  but  his  power  to  influence  the 


84  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

foreign  policy  of  his  Government  is  usually  stronger. 
It  is  more  concentrated,  wielded  more  skilfully,  and 
is  more  direct  in  its  action. 

The  enormous  recent  growth  of  foreign  investments 
among  the  well-to-do  means  that  when  any  foreign 
country  comes  into  the  purview  of  our  national 
policy,  there  are  men  in  our  governing  classes  whose 
personal  fortunes  are  affected  for  good  or  evil  by  its 
handling.  This  dominating  and  directing  influence 
of  investments  in  our  imperial  and  foreign  policy  is 
well  illustrated  in  the  events  culminating  in  the  Boer 
War  and  the  annexation  of  the  two  Dutch  Republics. 
I  know  no  instance  in  which  the  dominant  drive  of 
economic  interests  was  more  manifest.  The  powerful 
desire  and  intention  of  the  vigorous  and  pushful 
business  men  upon  the  Rand,  to  strengthen  their 
hold  upon  the  gold  reef  so  as  to  secure  for  themselves 
its  profitable  output  and  to  escape  the  taxation, 
blackmailing  and  other  obstructive  duties  of  a  foolish 
and  incompetent  Government,  were  beyond  all  ques- 
tion the  determinant  forces  in  the  policy  that  was 
formulated.  This  statement,  however,  must  be 
harmonized  with  the  equally  true  statement  that 
neither  the  British  people,  nor  the  British  Govern- 
ment, nor  the  vast  majority  of  British  South  Africans 
were  motived  mainly,  or  at  all  consciously,  by  any 
such  economic  motive.  The  chief  agents  of  this 
policy,  Chamberlain,  Rhodes  and  Lord  Milner,  were, 
so  far  as  history  shows,  actuated  by  political  motives 
in  which  the  idea  of  imperial  expansion  doubtless 
coalesced  with  the  sense  of  personal  ambition,  but  in 
which  distinctively  economic  gains  either  for  them- 
selves or  for  others  played  no  determinant  part.     In 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    85 

the  case  of  Chamberlain  and  Lord  Milner  the  absence 
of  economic  motive  is  indisputable.  They  worked  to 
precipitate  a  struggle  which  should  bring  the  downfall 
and  the  annexation  of  the  Dutch  Republics,  because 
they  wished  to  secure  a  federation  of  South  African 
States  under  the  British  Flag  as  a  step  desirable  in 
itself  and  still  more  as  a  contribution  towards  the 
larger  ideal  of  Imperial  Federation  which  Chamberlain 
had  espoused  as  the  goal  of  his  colonial  policy.  The 
case  of  Rhodes  was  different.  His  economic  interests 
were  identified  with  those  of  the  other  business  men 
upon  the  Rand,  and  the  subtle  bonds  between  pro- 
perty and  personal  power  must  be  held  to  have  exer- 
cised a  powerful  influence  upon  his  policy.  But  even 
here  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  genuineness  of 
his  passion  for  imperial  expansion  as  a  desirable  end, 
or  the  enthusiasm  expressed  in  his  phrase  "  The  North 
is  my  idea." 

The  great  volume  of  feeling,  both  in  South  Africa 
and  in  this  country,  which  favoured  forcible  inter- 
ference with  the  two  Republics,  was  almost  wholly 
free  from  conscious  economic  bias.  The  demand  for 
the  franchise  and  the  whole  tale  of  Outlanders' 
grievances  were  based  upon  political  and  humani- 
tarian sentiment.  The  alleged  maltreatment  of 
British  subjects  was  fortified  by  the  barbarity  of  the 
native  policy  in  the  Republics  and  driven  home  by 
the  fable  of  the  great  Boer  conspiracy  to  '*  drive  the 
British  into  the  sea."  Justice,  humanity,  prestige, 
expansion,  political  ambition,  all  conspired  to  dwarf 
the  significance  of  the  business  motive.  But  per- 
sistence, point,  direction  and  intelligible  aim  belonged 
to  the  latter.     The  financiers  of  De  Beers,  the  Rand 


86         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

and  the  Chartered  Company,  are,  therefore,  rightly 
recognized  as  "  engineering  "  the  policy  which  brought 
war  and  conquest.     No  doubt  they  could  not  have 
succeeded  in  getting  what  they  wanted,  viz.  improved 
security   for   present   and   prospective   investments, 
had  it  not  been  for  the  personal  ambition  of  a  British 
statesman  and  the  political  and  humanitarian  senti- 
ments behind  him.     But  these  non-economic  motives 
were  a  fund  of  loose,  ill-directed  force  for  them  to 
utilize.     Nor  were  the  methods  of  doing  this  obscure. 
They  needed  to  control  the  British  Press  and  politics 
of  South  Africa.     It  was  not  difficult  for  the  owners 
or  managers  of  the  sole  sources  of  wealth  in  such  a 
country  to  compass  this.     They  owned  the  Press  and 
they  were  the  politicians.     From  South  Africa  they 
operated    upon    public    opinion    in    Great    Britain. 
Society  and  its  political  support  was  purchased  by 
directorates  and  well-planted  blocks  of  shares.  When 
the  appointed  time  came  to  force  upon  public  opinion 
and  national  policy  the  mine-owners'  policy,  agents 
of  the  Rand  financiers  "  saw  "  the  politicians  and 
editors  of  both  parties,  organized  a  missionary  cam- 
paign among  the  Churches  to  expose  the  cruel  treat- 
ment of  the  Kaffirs,  and  through  their  command  of 
the  cables  and  the  Press  of  South  Africa  poured 
"  Outlander   atrocities  "    and  "  Dutch   conspiracy  " 
into  the  innocent  mind  of  the  British  public.     When 
the  issue  of  war  was  trembling  in  the  balance,  the 
widespread  ownership  of  mining  shares  in  hundreds 
of    influential    local   circles    all    over   the    country 
secretly  assisted  to  mobilize  public  opinion  in  favour 
of  determined  action.     Though  the  diplomacy  which 
precipitated  war  was  conducted  by  politicians,  the 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    87 

policy  it  developed  and  enforced  was  designed, 
directed,  and  prepared  in  detail  by  business  men 
in  South  Africa  and  London.  While  the  Prime 
Minister  declared  quite  veraciously,  so  far  as  he  and 
the  bulk  of  the  British  nation  were  concerned,  "  We 
seek  no  gold  fields,  we  seek  no  territory,' '  the  war 
policy  was  imposed  on  him  by  those  who  sought 
those  very  objects. 

This  classic  modern  instance  of  Imperialism  pre- 
sents in  clearest  outline  the  relation  between  eco- 
nomic and  non-economic  factors  in  foreign  policy. 
It  was  only  exceptional  in  the  directly  conscious 
nature  of  its  u  engineering/'  In  most  instances  the 
cloak  of  patriotism  is  worn  more  skilfully,  and  the 
blend  of  business  interests  with  racial  or  nationalist 
sentiment,  with  historic  memories  and  claims,  with 
considerations  of  frontier  defence,  balance  of  power, 
and  the  fears,  suspicions  and  enmities  that  relate 
thereto,  is  more  baffling  to  analyse. 

Moreover,  foreign  policy  and  the  relation  between 
States  involved  therein  must  not  be  envisaged  merely 
in  terms  of  opposition  and  of  conflict.  There  is  in 
the  modern  widening  of  human  intercourse  a  large 
and  various  growth  of  common  interests  and  activities 
among  men  of  different  nations  which  for  certain 
purposes  requires  and  evokes  the  friendly  co-operation 
of  States  and  calls  into  being  genuinely  international 
institutions.  Much  of  the  inter-State  apparatus  of 
intercourse,  of  which  the  Inter-postal  Union  may  be 
cited  as  a  leading  instance,  is  so  manifestly  beneficial 
to  all  parties  that  any  slight  differences  of  interest 
which  may  arise  in  ordinary  times  are  easily  adjusted. 
So  obviously  serviceable  is  this  network  of  peaceful 


88         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

co-operation  between  members  of  different  political 
communities  that  it  has  operated  to  cloak  the  real 
dangers  of  the  situation.  Economic  cosmopolitanism 
in  trade  and  finance,  with  the  inter-State  arrangements 
to  which  I  have  referred,  has  appeared  to  give  such 
powerful  and  such  growing  guarantees  of  peace 
that  pacifists  have  been  accustomed  to  denounce 
as  obsolete  medievalism  the  statecraft  which  eyes 
other  States  with  enmity  or  with  suspicion,  and 
which  seeks  national  security  in  armed  preparations. 
This  pacifist  illusion  was  based  upon  a  belief  that  in 
modern  civilized  States  the  art  of  government  was  so 
conducted  in  really  critical  issues  as  to  express  the 
will  and  serve  the  interests  of  the  peoples.  It  ought 
not,  however,  to  have  needed  this  war  to  dispel 
that  illusion.  Neither  the  economic  nor  the  human 
solidarity  of  interests  between  men  of  different  nations 
avails  to  keep  the  peace,  if  powerful  business  groups 
within  these  nations,  with  a  grasp  upon  their  govern- 
mental policy,  find  their  interests  in  collision.  We 
have  already  seen  how  modern  capitalism  has  gener- 
ated these  group  antagonisms  of  business  interests 
in  modern  industrial  nations,  driving  them  to  force 
on  their  respective  Governments  related  policies  of 
Protectionism  and  Imperialism  which  require  the 
permanent  support  of  militarism  and  navalism  and 
the  occasional  recourse  to  war.  The  cosmopoli- 
tanism which  is  a  growing  characteristic  of  the  modern 
business  world  is  crossed  and  reversed  by  business 
antagonisms  masquerading  as  "  national "  whenever 
these  group  forces  find  it  profitable  to  control  and 
use  their  respective  Governments.  The  competing 
Imperialism  of  the  last  forty  years  has  been  quite 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    89 

manifestly  directed  by  this  motif.  It  has  been  a 
struggle  for  markets,  loans,  concessions,  and  oppor- 
tunities for  profitable  exploitation  in  weak  or  back- 
ward countries,  in  which  the  Governments  of  the 
Great  Powers  have  schemed  and  fought  in  connivance 
with  or  at  the  behest  of  strong  business  organizations. 
We  have  cited  the  instance  of  the  Transvaal.  But  a 
brief  general  survey  of  the  chief  danger-areas  in 
recent  world-politics  is  required  to  drive  the  lesson 
home. 

What  are  these  areas  of  international  disturbances 
and  imperialist  ambitions  ?  Egypt,  Congo,  Morocco, 
Transvaal,  Persia,  Tripoli,  China,  Mexico,  Anatolia 
and  Mesopotamia,  the  Balkans.  With  wide  variety 
of  circumstances,  the  essential  story  is  the  same. 
Trading  and  financial  interests  play  upon  political 
fears  and  desires,  in  order  to  gain  their  profitable  ends. 
Where  finance  wins  predominance  as  the  economic 
motive,  this  manipulation  of  political  motives  and 
actions  becomes  more  and  more  the  clue  to  inter- 
national entanglements.  It  is  true  that  in  some 
instances  political  motives  have  an  independent 
origin.  Where  it  happens  that  in  the  co-operation 
of  "  imperialist  "  policy  and  economic  exploitation 
each  "  uses  "  the  other,  the  financier  recognizes  the 
advantages  of  keeping  in  the  background.  This  was 
even  the  case  in  Egypt.  Though  Lord  Cromer's 
opening  sentence  in  his  "  Modern  Egypt  "  announces 
that  "  The  origin  of  the  Egyptian  question  in  its 
modern  phase  was  financial,"  and  the  story  of  the 
English  and  French  creditors  pressing  their  Govern- 
ments to  foreclose  upon  the  property  has  been 
attested    by   convincing    testimony,    most    Britons 


90         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

prefer  to  accept  the  purely  political  interpretation 
of  the  episode.  Even  Mr.  Hartley  Withers,  ignoring 
the  actual  evidence  of  the  financial  pressure  on 
the  Ministry,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  obligation  of  the 
Government  to  safeguard  the  life  and  property  of 
British  subjects  in  foreign  parts,  established  by  the 
famous  instance  of  Don  Pacifico,  assigns  the  efficient 
causation  to  diplomacy,  not  to  finance.  Now,  it  is 
true,  as  he  urges,1  that  the  position  of  Egypt  on  the 
route  to  India  made  it  appear  important  to  our 
statesmen  that  our  Government  should  have  a  hold 
upon  the  country.  But  when  Mr.  Withers  suggests 
that,  alike  in  purchasing  shares  in  the  Suez  Canal  and 
in  using  the  claims  of  English  bondholders  as  an 
excuse  for  establishing  its  power  in  Egypt,  English 
diplomacy  was  using  finance,  instead  of  being  used 
by  it,  he  ignores  the  plain  fact  that  the  political 
motive  in  each  instance  lay  idle  until  it  was  stimulated 
into  activity  by  the  more  energetic  and  constructive 
policy  of  the  financier. 

It  is  doubtless  true  that  finance  is  not  equally 
capable  of  utilizing  diplomacy  under  all  circumstances. 
"  If  Egypt  had  been  Brazil/'  says  Mr.  Withers,  "  it 
is  not  very  likely  that  the  British  Fleet  would  have 
shelled  Rio  de  Janeiro/'  But  this  instance,  cited  to 
show  that  the  motive  force  in  the  Egyptian  episode 
was  not  financial,  shows  the  opposite.  For  it  pro- 
vides the  "  exception  "  that  "  proves  the  rule/'  The 
reason  why  Rio  de  Janeiro  would  not  have  been  shelled 
is  found  in  the  Monroe  Doctrine  and  the  strength 
of  the  United  States.  In  other  words,  the  financial 
game  of  politics  can  only  be  played  out  in  ill-defended 

*  "  International  Finance,"  pp.  98-102. 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    91 

countries.  A  recent  American  writer  has  well- 
expressed  the  economic  and  political  conditions  which 
conspire  to  make  a  country  a  bone  of  political  con- 
tention : — 

It  is  essential  to  remember  that  what  turns  a  territory 
into  a  diplomatic  problem  is  the  combination  of  natural 
resources,  cheap  labour  markets,  defencelessness,  corrupt 
and  inefficient  government.1 

Apply  these  conditions  to  each  of  the  above-named 
areas  of  trouble,  and  you  will  find  that  they  fit  the 
situation.  Financial  and  commercial  policy  take 
different  shapes  in  different  cases. 

Sometimes  the  initial  wedge  of  financial  interest 
consists  in  feeding  the  extravagances  of  a  spendthrift 
monarch,  as  in  Egypt  and  Morocco,  or  in  pressing 
loans  upon  a  backward  country  for  undefined  work 
of  "  development/'  which  often  includes  expenditure 
on  armaments.  Such  have  been  the  early  dealings 
with  Turkey  and  with  certain  South  American  States. 
But  generally  there  has  existed,  even  at  the  outset, 
a  more  concrete  business  object,  the  development  of 
railroads  or  of  mining  resources,  the  working  of  rubber 
plantations,  oil  wells,  or  some  other  rich,  natural 
source  of  wealth.  When  mere  trade  has  given  an 
initial  impulse,  the  organization  of  labour  within  the 
country,  for  working  and  collecting  and  marketing 
the  trade-objects,  ivory,  rubber,  etc.,  has  soon  taken 
command  of  the  situation,  as  on  the  Amazon,  in 
Congo,  and  in  Angola.  So  practical  Imperialism  has 
commonly  worked  out  in  a  system  of  servile  and 

1  Mr.  Walter  Lippman,  "The  Stakes  of  Diplomacy,"  p.  93. 


92         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

forced  labour  imposed  by  white  superintendents 
for  the  advantage  of  financiers  and  shareholders  in 
London,  Paris,  Berlin  or  Brussels.  Although  political 
ambitions  and  rivalries  figure  most  prominently,  the 
real  contentions  have  usually  been  between  two  or 
more  groups  of  business  men  in  different  nations, 
pulling  diplomatic  strings  in  favour  of  the  special  con- 
cessions which  they  seek  in  one  of  these  undeveloped 
areas.  As  more  Western  nations  have  felt  the  need 
for  outside  markets  in  which  to  buy  and  sell  and  to 
invest  their  surplus  wealth,  these  financial  pressures 
upon  foreign  policy  have  been  more  urgent  and  the 
controversies  which  they  have  stirred  up  more  acute. 
While  foreign  and  colonial  ministers  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  parading  political  exigencies  and  patriotic 
sentiments  in  favour  of  their  special  foreign  policy, 
the  patient  forces  in  the  background,  moulding  that 
policy,  become  in  every  decade  more  definitely 
financial.  Now,  if,  as  is  sometimes  pretended,  the 
finance  were  genuinely  international  or  cosmopolitan, 
instead  of  exciting  it  might  allay  the  friction  between 
Governments.  There  have  been  moments  and  occa- 
sions when  the  financial  arrangements  between 
business  groups  in  different  countries  have  been  a 
pacific  force.  This  was  the  case  at  one  time  in  regard 
to  Morocco,  when  a  combine  of  the  Mannesmann  and 
Creusot  interests  for  the  common  exploitation  of  the 
iron  ore  of  that  country  seemed  on  the  point  of 
bringing  the  German  and  French  Governments  into 
a  harmonious  arrangement.  A  similar  harmony 
between  opposed  financial  interests  of  traders  and 
bankers  was  brought  about  in  Persia  when  the  British 
and  Russian  Governments  divided  up  the  country 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    93 

into  separate  spheres  of  exploitation.  But  of  course 
there  are  two  defects  in  such  economic  settlements, 
regarded  from  the  standpoint  of  political  adjustment. 
They  have  commonly  been  confined  to  two  or  three 
national  interests  and  have  frozen  out  the  trading  or 
financial  interests  of  some  other  Powers,  as  was  the 
case  with  German  interests  in  Persia.  Moreover, 
these  arrangements,  forced  upon  the  Government 
and  people  of  the  backward  State,  have  little  perma- 
nence or  security,  and  are  likely  to  lead  to  further 
intrigues  on  the  part  of  the  "  vulture  "  Governments, 
each  hungry  for  a  larger  share  of  the  prey,  and  likely 
to  endeavour  to  stir  up  internal  disturbances  as  a 
means  of  rinding  satisfaction  for  its  ever-growing 
appetite. 

The  story  of  the  various  measures  taken  by  financial 
groups  in  various  countries,  with  the  active  support 
of  their  respective  Foreign  Offices,  to  promote  the 
financial  penetration  of  China,  is  the  crucial  example 
of  the  interplay  of  foreign  policy  and  finance.  The 
full  history  of  the  fluctuating  policy  of  the  Powers  in 
their  treatment  of  China,  now  moving  towards  parti- 
tion into  separate  spheres  of  influence  and  exploitation, 
now  reverting  to  "  the  open  door,"  the  changing 
combinations  of  Government-assisted  groups  in  the 
leading  countries,  and  the  attempt  of  outside  financial 
adventurers  to  break  the  ring,  will  perhaps  never 
emerge  from  its  underground  passages  into  the  clear 
light  of  day.  But  enough  has  come  out  in  official 
documents,  Parliament  and  the  Press,  to  enable  us 
to  construct  with  a  fair  amount  of  certitude  the  main 
instructive  outlines  of  the  episode. 

In  China,  as  elsewhere,  war  sowed  the  seeds  of  a 


94  DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

monetary  embarrassment,  of  which  money-lenders 
were  to  reap  a  rich  harvest.  In  1894  China,  in  diffi- 
culties to  find  the  war-indemnity  imposed  by  Japan, 
was  driven  to  negotiate  a  7  per  cent,  loan  through 
the  Hong-Kong  and  Shanghai  Bank.  Next  year  a 
combination  of  two  French  banks  issued  a  China 
loan.  In  1896  an  alliance  between  the  Hong-Kong 
and  the  Deutsch-Asiatisch  Bank,  which  lasted 
through  the  next  sixteen  years,  laid  a  solid  basis  of 
international  political  pressure,  leading  to  the  floating 
of  a  number  of  Chinese  Government  loans,  on  highly 
profitable  terms  to  British  and  German  financiers. 
The  suppression  of  the  Boxer  trouble  in  1899  by  the 
joint  forces  of  the  Powers  had  two  consequences. 
First,  it  left  a  large  new  indemnity,  a  fresh  source  of 
political-financial  pressure  for  the  several  Powers. 
Secondly,  it  dissipated  for  some  time  the  "  partition  " 
policy,  which  had  revived  with  the  territorial  aggres- 
sions of  Germany,  Russia  and  Japan,  and  led,  under 
the  active  pressure  of  America,  to  the  formal  adoption 
of  "  the  open  door "  for  commerce  and  financial 
enterprise.  The  British-German  "  consortium  "  held 
the  field  until  1911,  when,  largely  as  a  result  of 
diplomatic  pressure,  French  and  American  banking 
groups  were  brought  into  the  alliance,  known  hence- 
forth as  the  Four-Power  Group.  The  inclusion  of 
America,  not  at  that  time  a  lending  country  and 
therefore  suspected  of  political  aims,  brought  about 
next  year  such  pressure  from  the  Russian  and  the 
Japanese  Governments  that  it  was  necessary  to  admit 
their  nominees,  the  Russo-Asiatic  Bank  and  the  Yoko- 
hama Specie  Bank,  into  the  arrangement,  henceforth 
designated  the  Six-Power  Group.     Regarded  as  a 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    95 

financial  arrangement,  the  addition  of  Russia  and 
Japan  brought  no  new  strength.  For,  if  they  were 
to  lend  money,  they  must  first  borrow  it,  swelling  the 
costs  with  the  profits  of  unnecessary  middlemen,  and 
utilizing  this  finance  quite  evidently  for  political 
purposes. 

The  motives  of  the  Governments  which  promoted 
these  financial  arrangements  were  doubtless  mixed. 
Two  of  them,  Russia  and  Japan,  were  actuated 
primarily  by  considerations  of  territorial  and  political 
aggrandisement.  The  Governments  of  these  countries 
expressly  demanded  that  their  "  rights  and  special 
interests,"  i.e.  in  Manchuria,  Mongolia,  etc.,  should 
be  recognized,  and  Germany,  recently  planted  in 
Kiaochow,  was  doubtless  animated  by  a  desire  to 
fasten  a  political  as  well  as  an  industrial  control  over 
the  province  of  Shantung.  Great  Britain,  France, 
and  America  stood  in  the  main  for  the  territorial 
integrity  and  political  independence  of  China  and  for 
an  "  open  door."  But  even  this  statement  requires 
qualification.  For  France  more  than  once  was 
pulled  by  her  Russian  alliance  into  favouring  the 
assertion  of  special  Russian  interests  in  Mongolia, 
while  Great  Britain  still  retained  some  sort  of  special 
lien  upon  the  exploitation  of  the  Yang  Tse  Valley. 

In  the  various  pressures  exerted  by  the  Two,  Four 
and  Six-Power  Groups  upon  the  Chinese  Government 
to  borrow  money  in  constantly  increasing  quantities, 
it  is  not  possible  to  prove  how  far  the  initiative  was 
taken  by  the  financial  groups,  how  far  by  the  Foreign 
Offices.  No  doubt  it  seemed  diplomatically  desirable 
to  entangle  a  Government  like  that  of  China  with 
burdens  of  indebtedness  which  might  at  any  time  be 


96         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

utilized  for  political  ends.  But  with  the  exception 
of  the  two  Eastern  Powers,  the  main  drive  of  interests 
was  admittedly  economic,  not  political,  and  the  foreign 
policy  of  their  Governments  must  be  regarded  as 
having  been  moved  and  directed  primarily  by  finance. 
This  judgment  is  powerfully  corroborated  by  the 
extraordinary  attitude  taken  by  our  Foreign  Office 
upon  the  two  occasions  when  other  financial  groups 
sought  to  enter  the  field  and  to  furnish  China  with 
the  money  she  required,  upon  terms  which  seemed 
desirable  to  the  Chinese  Government.  The  first  case 
was  that  of  an  international  syndicate  of  Russian, 
French,  Belgian  and  English  groups,  of  which  the 
leading  English  body  was  the  Eastern  Bank,  which 
endeavoured  in  1912,  unsuccessfully,  to  obtain  the 
Foreign  Office  sanction  for  participating  in  any 
future  loans  arranged  with  the  Chinese  Government. 
The  reasons  given  for  the  refusal  by  the  Foreign 
Office  deserve  to  be  placed  on  record. 

In  regard  to  loans  in  China,  it  is  impossible  for  the 
moment  for  His  Majesty's  Government  to  support  negotia- 
tions for  a  loan  which  might  conflict  with  the  terms  or 
weaken  the  security  for  the  large  loan  for  reorganiza- 
tion purposes  which  is  at  present  being  negotiated  in 
Pekin  by  the  Four- Power  combine,  with  the  full  knowledge 
of  their  respective  Governments,  and  in  regard  to  which 
advances  have  already  been  made  to  the  Chinese  Govern- 
ment by  the  banks  interested,  with  the  full  approval  of 
their  Governments.  I  am  to  add  that,  as  a  matter  of 
principle,  His  Majesty's  Government  would  not  feel 
justified  in  giving  their  support  to  any  loan  which  did 
not,  in  their  opinion,  and  in  the  opinion  of  the  other 
Governments  concerned,   offer   adequate   guarantees  for 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM     97 

the  proper  and  useful  expenditure  of  the  proceeds  and 
satisfactory  security  for  the  payment  of  principal  and 
interest. 


Here,  then,  we  have  the  admission  of  a  private 
profiteering  scheme  of  financiers  of  different  countries, 
described  as  "■  a  Four-Power  combine/ '  authorized 
and  supported  by  their  respective  Governments, 
which  undertake  to  secure  for  them  a  monopoly  in 
loanmongering  by  refusing  the  assistance  which  any 
other  group  would  require  in  dealing  with  a  foreign 
Government.  Not  merely  do  the  Governments  refuse 
"support"  to  competing  financiers  who  are  offering 
money  to  China  upon  better  terms  than  the  authorized 
groups ;  they  actually  oppose  and  obstruct  such 
healthy  competition.  Of  this  we  may  cite  two 
illustrations.  The  first  is  the  stoppage  of  a  loan  of 
two  millions  arranged  by  a  Belgian  syndicate  for  the 
construction  of  a  Chinese  railway.  This  was  stopped 
by  the  veto  of  the  French  Government  upon  a  quota- 
tion on  the  Bourse,  the  explanation  being  "  French 
obligations  to  the  other  five  Powers.' '  In  other 
words,  Belgium  was  outside  the  Government  author- 
ized ring.  The  second  more  famous  example  was  the 
treatment  by  our  Foreign  Office  of  the  Crisp  loan, 
a  loan  of  ten  millions  organized  in  London  by  a 
powerful  syndicate  of  banks.  When  Mr.  Crisp, 
disregarding  the  representations  of  our  Foreign  Office 
to  the  effect  that  "  His  Majesty's  Government  did 
not  consider  that  China  was  free  to  borrow  outside 
the  consortium  until  the  repayment  of  the  advances 
made  by  the  latter  had  been  duly  provided  for," 
proceeded    to    carry   his    arrangements    to    a    con- 

7 


98         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

elusion,  Sir  Edward  Grey  telegraphed  to  our  Pekin 
Minister  : — 

I  am  in  communication  with  them  (the  Crisp  Syndicate) 
with  the  view  to  stopping  the  execution  of  the  agreement, 
if  possible.  Should  I  fail  in  that,  it  will  become  necessary 
to  deal  with  the  matter  by  direct  communication  with  the 
Chinese  Government. 

Mr.  Gregory,  of  the  Foreign  Office,  informed  Mr. 
Crisp  that  "  they  could  put  considerable  pressure  on 
the  Chinese  Government,  and  would  not  hesitate  to 
do  so  at  once."  A  little  later  on  we  find  our  Foreign 
Office  telegraphing  to  our  Pekin  Minister  that  if  the 
Chinese  Government  does  sanction  the  Crisp  loan 
"  His  Majesty's  Government  will  be  obliged  to  take 
the  most  serious  view  of  such  proceedings/ ' 

You  are  aware  that  we  are  disposed  to  show  every 
consideration  to  the  Chinese  Government  in  facilitating 
their  negotiations  with  the  groups,  but  our  attitude  will 
have  to  be  entirely  reconsidered  if  the  Chinese  Govern- 
ment on  their  part  defy  us  in  a  matter  in  which  they  know 
that  we  are  pledged  to  act  with  the  five  other  Powers. 

But  in  considering  this  curious  conspiracy  between 
financial  groups  and  Governments,  it  is  well  to  draw 
attention  to  the  concluding  sentence  in  Sir  Edward 
Grey's  despatch,  as  quoted  above.  For  it  asserts  the 
extraordinary  doctrine  that  when  private  financiers 
arrange  a  loan  with  a  foreign  Government,  the  State 
of  which  these  financiers  are  nationals  not  merely 
shall  see  that  the  guarantees  for  repayment  are 
adequate  but  shall  supervise  the  expenditure  of  the 


PROTECTIONISM  AND  IMPERIALISM    99 

money  that  is  advanced.  In  other  words,  Stock 
Exchange  financiers  are  not  to  be  considered  fit 
persons  to  take  care  of  their  own  interests  abroad, 
and  foreign  Governments  are  not  fit  to  decide  how 
the  money  which  they  borrow  may  be  used.  It  is 
very  difficult  to  understand  how  far  this  inter- 
fering policy  is  actuated  by  political  and  how  far 
by  financial  considerations.  On  the  evidence,  it 
seems  as  if  groups  of  financiers  had  leagued  together 
to  induce  their  Governments  to  bring  united  pressure 
on  the  Chinese  Government  to  borrow  larger  sums  of 
money  than  were  wanted,  and  to  admit  into  this 
financial  participation  Powers  which,  like  Russia  and 
Japan,  had  no  money  of  their  own  to  lend  but  had 
heavy  political  axes  to  grind.  Although  the  Foreign 
Offices  of  European  Powers  may  have  been  actuated 
in  part  by  the  principle  that  it  was  best  to  act  in 
concert  so  as  to  prevent  loans  from  individual  groups 
which  would  be  used  to  obtain  political  advantages 
for  particular  countries  as  against  the  general  advan- 
tage of  China  itself,  it  is  practically  certain  that 
business  men  ran  this  policy  for  all  it  was  worth, 
seeing  how  it  might  be  worked  to  secure  for  them  a 
"  cinch  "  upon  this  profitable  lending.  They  were 
to  find  the  money,  their  Government  was  to  extort 
guarantees  for  the  security  of  this  money  and,  by 
stopping  the  competition  of  other  groups,  either  in 
their  own  country  or  elsewhere,  to  secure  for  them 
better  terms  than  they  could  have  got  had  the  business 
been  conducted  on  the  principle  of  "  the  open  door." 
The  Times,  in  writing  of  the  incident,  described 
the  Six-Power  Group  as  the  "  financial  agents  "  of 
their  Governments.     But  it  would  probably  be  more 


ioo         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

consonant  with  the  facts  to  describe  the  Government 
as  the  "  political  agents  "  of  the  groups.  One  thing 
is  tolerably  clear,  viz.  that  "  the  general  advantage 
of  China  "  played  no  real  part  in  determining  the 
action  either  of  groups  or  Governments. 

The  financiers  were  after  safe  and  profitable  loans, 
the  Governments  were  either  after  spheres  of  influence, 
as  with  Russia  and  Japan,  or  after  preventing  one 
another  from  pursuing  a  separate  and  exclusive 
policy  of  marking  out  areas  of  political  and  economic 
control. 

This  joint  political-financial  coercion  of  China 
eventually  broke  down.  But  as  an  episode  in  foreign 
policy  it  is  most  illuminating.  For  it  shows  from  a 
typical  modern  instance  how  the  money  power  within 
each  State  is  able  to  utilize  a  foreign  policy,  in  which 
Governments  are  continually  wobbling  between  con- 
flicting "  principles  "  of  "  spheres  of  influence  "  and 
"  open  door,"  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  lucrative 
financial  operations.  For  the  business  men  of  the 
Great  Powers,  China  is  a  huge  field  of  commercial  and 
financial  exploitation,  and  their  respective  Govern- 
ments with  their  shifty  policies  are  tools  for  its  profit- 
able working.  During  the  war  Japan  and  Russia 
have  utilized  the  great  advantage  of  proximity,  and 
when  the  fog  is  once  more  cleared  will  be  found  to 
have  played  havoc  with  the  "  open  door,"  forcing 
their  exclusive  pretensions,  commercial  and  political, 
upon  large  areas  which  they  had  already  marked 
down  for  absorption. 

Such  has  been  the  common  history  of  the  processes 
by  which  countries,  which  had  begun  by  being 
"  areas  of  legitimate  aspiration  "  to  powerful  business 


PROTECTIONISM  AND'  IMPERIALISM    ior 

groups,  pass  along  the  diplomatically  graded  path 
towards  "  spheres  of  influence,"  protectorates  or 
colonial  possessions.  No  doubt  it  is  true  that  when 
this  takes  place  politics  is  "  in  it  "  on  its  own  account, 
as  well  as  business,  but  the  active  initiation  and  direc- 
tion are  generally  exercised  by  the  latter.  Even  in 
those  modern  instances  of  French  and  Russian 
Imperialism,  where  political  pride  or  distinctively 
territorial  ambitions  figure  most  prominently,  the 
"  dark  forces "  of  finance  have  been  constantly 
operative  in  the  background. 

Once  more  I  repeat,  it  is  not  a  question  of  the 
volume  of  power  but  of  its  direction.  Political  and 
sentimental  policy  is  more  fluctuating  and  volatile 
than  economic  policy.  The  late  Sir  James  Stephen 
truly  said,  "  The  world  is  made  for  hard  practical 
men  who  know  what  they  want  and  mean  to  get  it." 
Though  "  practical  "  is  not  wholly  synonymous  with 
"  business,"  the  business  world  furnishes  by  far  the 
largest  scope  for  "  hard  practical  "  ability.  Imperial- 
ism is  the  decorative  title  for  the  widest  operation 
of  this  practical  ability,  and  militarism  and  navalism 
are  essential  instruments  for  its  profitable  exercise. 


CHAPTER   V 

POLITICAL   AND  INTELLECTUAL 
REACTIONISTS 

Beginning  our  investigation  of  the  processes  of 
reaction  with  the  inroads  made  by  militarism  upon 
civil  rights  and  popular  self-government,  we  seemed 
to  discover  that  the  State  policy  of  which  militarism 
was  the  instrument  was  mainly  moulded  and  directed, 
not  by  considerations  of  the  welfare  of  the  people 
but  by  the  interests  and  pressures  of  particular  groups 
aiming  to  secure  economic  gains.  This  interest- 
ocracy  within  each  State  of  landowners,  capitalists, 
commercial  profiteers  and  financiers,  is  impelled  by 
its  business  aims  to  direct  alike  the  internal  and  the 
external  policy  of  its  State  in  ways  hostile  to  demo- 
cracy upon  the  one  hand,  and  to  internationalism 
upon  the  other.  Its  need  to  control  the  home  markets 
makes  it  protectionist :  its  need  to  defend  the  vested 
interests  of  improperty  obliges  it  to  control  the 
electorate,  to  man  Parliament  with  its  representatives, 
to  give  increasing  power  both  legislative  and  adminis- 
trative to  a  non-elected  Cabinet,  and  to  a  strong  secret 
upper-class  bureaucracy,  so  as  to  defeat,  direct,  or 
annul  in  operation,  any  dangerous  assaults  made  by 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  103 

the  people  through  electoral  or  other  organized 
pressure.  This  control  of  political  and  legal  machinery 
requires  the  manipulation  of  moral  and  intellectual 
forces  so  as  to  create  a  public  opinion  and  habits  of 
thought  and  sentiment  favourable  to  it.  Behind 
these  controls,  in  order  to  establish  confidence  and 
to  provide  against  emergencies,  militarism  is  main- 
tained, for  the  repression  of  social-economic  disorder 
at  home  and  for  the  forcible  achievement  of  those 
business  purposes  which  underlie  a  strong  foreign 
policy.  The  very  existence  of  this  militarism,  by 
stimulating  the  fears,  suspicions  and  hostility  of  other 
States,  similarly  dominated  and  directed  by  their 
group-interests,  appears  to  justify  itself  by  helping 
to  create  a  dangerous  world  in  which  strong  martial 
force  is  a  necessary  precaution. 

This  formal  analysis,  with  its  emphasis  upon  the 
play  of  economic  forces,  is  of  course  far  too  simple  to 
contain  the  whole  truth.  This  selfish  business-man 
is  neither  clever  enough  nor  unscrupulous  enough  to 
invent  and  arrange  all  the  elaborate  political,  moral 
and  intellectual  apparatus  of  the  reactionary  alliance. 
Commercial  men  and  financiers  will  always  use 
politics  in  certain  plain  ways,  to  get  State  aids  and 
favours  dangled  immediately  before  their  noses,  or 
to  carry  out  some  clearly  conceived  business  plan 
which  needs  Foreign  Office  support.  But  to  impute 
to  them  wide  and  intricate  designs  of  controlling  the 
State  and  mastering  all  the  arts  of  public  opinion  for 
the  defence  or  furtherance  of  business  ends  will  seem 
to  many  an  absurdly  exaggerated  charge.  I  make, 
however,  no  such  charge.  The  coercive  and  reaction- 
ary alliance  which  has  been  so  vividly  displayed  in 


104         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

the  flare  of  war  is  not  the  result  of  any  clearly  con- 
certed co-operation.  It  represents  rather  the  in- 
stinctive drawing  together  of  a  number  of  separate 
influences  by  some  mutual  sympathy.  Militarism  is 
not  merely  the  instrument  of  economic  power.  It  has 
its  own  direct  sources  of  appeal  to  the  fighting  instincts 
of  man  and  the  accumulated  prestige  of  the  fighting 
career.  Junkerdom  in  Prussia  and  elsewhere  is 
quarrelsome  by  proclivity,  and  its  predatory  policy 
is  not  confined  to  the  defence  of  its  land  values  and 
the  gains  of  a  protective  tariff  upon  agriculture. 
Similarly,  the  collective  passion  of  Jingoism  in  a 
people,  its  mixture  of  anger  and  fear,  is  rooted  in  the 
herd-mind  and  does  not  proceed  from  lust  for  plunder. 
These  natural  fighting  instincts  seek  satisfaction  on 
their  own  account.  But  they  generally  get  it  in 
modern  times  by  placing  themselves  at  the  service  of 
improperty.  So  it  is  with  the  other  forces  and  instru- 
ments of  reaction.  Clear,  conscious,  purposive  sub- 
mission to  the  rule  of  economic  potentates  is  very 
rare.  The  politician  thinks  primarily  of  his  personal 
career  and  the  success  of  his  party,  easily  identifying 
these  objects  with  the  larger  vague  concepts  of 
patriotism,  popular  welfare,  the  greatness  of  the 
Empire,  etc.  Politics  for  the  ordinary  working  politi- 
cian in  this  country,  front  bench  statesman,  private 
member,  local  caucus  man,  is  a  curious  compound  of 
(i)  loose  general  principles  commonly  couched  in 
accepted  party  formulas,  (2)  concrete  "  causes," 
proposals  or  measures  forming  the  current  party 
platform,  (3)  tactics  affecting  the  organization  and 
the  personnel  of  the  party  and  dealing  with  issues 
of  voting  power  in  Parliament  or  in  the  electorate. 


POLITICAL   REACTIONISTS  105 

In  these  overlapping  spheres  of  "  politics  "  he  finds  a 
personal  career  of  interest  and  activity  not  consciously 
affected  by  any  professional  or  business  aims  and 
influences  connected  with  the  sources  of  his  private 
income.  It  is  true  that  on  any  plane  of  politics  it  is 
well  recognized  that  certain  types  of  men  are  there 
for  "  what  they  can  get  out  of  it,"  and  that,  when 
some  particular  issue  is  up  of  direct  and  vital  interest 
to  a  particular  trade  or  class  of  property,  the  personal 
stake  will  count  heavily.  But  these  are  considered 
as  flaws  in  a  political  system  which  normally  works  in 
a  fairly  disinterested  way,  at  any  rate  in  such  a 
country  as  ours. 

There  is  only  one  gainful  occupation  where  personal 
advancement  and  professional  interests  are  so  closely 
interwoven  with  politics  as  to  constitute  a  permanent 
and  conscious  economic  bias.  In  this  and  most 
other  countries  the  predominance  in  number  and  in 
power  of  lawyer-politicians  has  long  been  recognized 
as  a  grave  danger.  There  is  a  general  understanding 
that  many  of  these  men  push  their  way  into  political 
prominence  in  order  to  get  lucrative  ofhces  or  pro- 
fessional business,  and  that  they  apply  the  practised 
arts  of  the  hired  partisan  to  the  vitiation  of  wholesome 
debate.  That  legal  skill  is  needed  for  the  drafting 
and  the  criticism  of  legislative  proposals  is  indubit- 
able. But  it  is  equally  evident  that  the  legal  skill 
should  be  that  of  advisory  counsel,  not  of  advocates. 
The  directly  personal  aims  and  ambitions  of  lawyer- 
politicians,  and  the  unblushing  effrontery  with  which 
as  a  body  they  have  always  opposed  and  obstructed 
measures  likely  to  reduce  the  work  and  the  emolu- 
ments of  their  profession,  have  long  been  an  accepted 


106        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

commonplace  of  politics.1  Indeed,  so  curiously  con- 
stituted is  the  general  mind  that  an  old-established 
grievance  ceases  to  be  felt  and  becomes  more  difficult 
of  removal.  An  old  abuse  is  respected  as  a  vested 
interest. 

But  this  open  use  of  politics  by  lawyers  for  selfish 
professional  ends  is  of  far  less  importance  than  the 
indirect  support  they  render  to  the  defence  of  impro- 
perty.  Not  only  the  body  but  the  spirit  of  the  laws 
affecting  property  in  this,  as  in  most  countries,  has 
been  made  by  the  powerful  propertied  classes  in  their 
own  interests,  for  the  defence  of  the  prevailing  forms 
of  economic  inequality  and  oppression. 

The  land  laws,  the  game  laws,  the  rating  laws,  the 
laws  relating  to  master  and  servant,  creditor  and 
debtor,  bankruptcy,  divorce,  inheritance,  banking, 
shipping,  are  consciously  and  purposely  weighted  in 
favour  of  specific  forms  of  economic  interest  or  status, 
while  the  whole  administration  of  the  law,  particu- 
larly in  its  bearing  on  contested  issues  of  property, 
operates  for  the  success  of  the  party  with  the  longest 
purse.  In  the  maintenance  of  these  abuses  and 
inequalities  lawyers  have  a  vested  interest,  and  as 
legislators  or  outside  politicians  they  can  usually  be 
relied  upon  to  oppose  all  effective  measures  for  redress- 
ing them.  But  not  less  important  than  this  conscious 
rally  to  the  interests  of  their  profession  and  of  their 

1  Reforms,  both  great  and  small,  have  always  suffered  from 
this  cause.  The  long-due  task  of  codification  of  our  Common 
Law  is  perhaps  the  largest  instance.  The  conspiracy  of  lawyers 
on  both  sides  of  the  House  to  oppose  any  reduction  in  the 
number  of  judicial  or  other  legal  appointments,  or  any  curtail- 
ment of  the  private  business  of  law  officers,  is  not  less  instructive. 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  107 

paymasters  is  the  sympathy  with  the  sentiments  and 
opinions  of  the  possessing  classes  which  lawyers 
imbibe  from  a  study  of  legal  theory,  itself  moulded 
by  class  interests  and  prepossessions,  and  from  a 
practice  which  has  confirmed  this  bias.  It  is  extremely 
difficult  for  an  experienced  lawyer  to  approach  any 
issue  of  property  from  the  human,  social  or  equitable 
standpoint,  or  from  any  other  standpoint  than  that 
of  existing  legal  right.  We,  therefore,  find  many 
lawyers  who  would  shrink  from  using  politics  for 
any  conscious  personal  or  professional  end,  drawn  by 
secret  threads  of  intellectual  and  social  sympathy 
into  a  purely  conservative  attitude  in  matters  of 
property.  This  conservative  bias  in  a  class  which 
plays  so  large  a  part  in  formulating  and  discussing 
legislative  proposals,  and  which  furnishes  sometimes 
a  majority,  always  at  least  a  large  minority,  of  the 
members  of  the  legislative  assemblies,  is  one  of  the 
most  potent  factors  in  the  confederacy  of  reaction. 
The  fact  that  lawyer-politicians,  motived  in  part  by 
obvious  professional  ends,  in  part  by  personal 
sympathies,  distribute  themselves  fairly  evenly 
between  the  strong  parties  in  each  State,  and  some- 
times even  furnish  leaders  in  feigned  attacks  on 
property,  does  not  affect  the  validity  of  this 
analysis  of  political  professionalism.  The  net  result 
of  their  activities  is  to  block  reforms. 

The  attitude  and  policy  of  representatives  of  great 
specific  business  interests  in  Parliament  are  less 
consciously  and  consistently  addicted  to  the  general 
defence  of  property.  The  House  of  Commons  is 
largely  composed  of  men  who  are  directors  of  banks, 
insurance    companies,    railways,    breweries,    mines, 


io8         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

shipbuilding  and  shipping  companies,  engineering 
and  other  manufacturing  or  commercial  enterprises, 
which  are  vitally  affected  by  particular  proposals  of 
legislation  or  finance  that  come  up  in  Parliament. 
When  any  question  emerges  for  discussion,  relating, 
say,  to  banks,  breweries  or  railways,  directors  of  such 
companies  are  usually  expected  to  defend  their  private 
business  interests,  irrespective  of  the  side  of  the 
House  on  which  they  sit  or  of  the  attitude  which  may 
be  taken  by  their  party  leaders.  Their  purely  ex 
parte  statements  and  arguments  are  often  gravely 
treated  as  authoritative  and  impartial  pronounce- 
ments by  qualified  and  impartial  experts,  and  com- 
monly prevail.  I  doubt,  indeed  (so  deceitful  is  the 
mind  of  man),  whether  the  shareholder  who  rises  in 
the  House  to  argue  on  behalf  of  his  dividends  has  the 
slightest  feeling  that  he  may  possibly  be  preferring 
his  own  interests  to  those  of  his  constituents  or  his 
country.  In  entering  Parliament  these  men  have 
commonly  conceived  themselves  as  actuated  by  public 
spirit  or  party  principle,  tinctured  perhaps  (the 
franker  of  them  would  admit  as  much)  by  some  senti- 
ment of  personal  importance  or  social  prestige,  but 
with  no  sort  of  feeling  that  they  are  "  on  the  job." 
Nor  are  they  in  any  strict  sense  of  the  term.  When 
their  business  interests  are  assailed,  they  naturally 
rise  to  defend  them.  Why  should  they  not  ?  When 
any  political  proposal  seems  likely  to  promote  the 
interests  of  their  trade,  their  "  trade  patriotism  " 
prompts  them  to  give  what  aid  they  can.  What  is 
wrong  in  that  ?  But  these  are  not  the  purposes  for 
which  they  are  in  Parliament !  These  plain  oppor- 
tunities for  feathering  their  private  nests  are  only 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  109 

occasional  and  incidental.  They  do  not  seriously 
disturb  the  complacent  attitude  adopted  by  these 
gentlemen,  and  accepted  by  the  general  public, 
that  the  Houses  of  Parliament  consist  of  men  who 
are  devoting  themselves  in  a  disinterested  way  to  the 
conduct  of  the  affairs  of  the  nation.  This  judgment 
appears  to  be  confirmed  by  the  divisions  of  business 
or  of  party  interest  which,  when  any  issue  arises 
affecting  the  profits  of  some  particular  business  group, 
impel  the  members  of  some  other  business  group  to 
speak  and  vote  in  opposition.  It  is  only  the  stronger 
interest  or  the  closer  organization  of  the  group  or 
trade  whose  gains  are  primarily  affected,  that  usually 
enables  it  to  succeed  in  the  defence  or  the  advancement 
of  its  property. 

The  work  of  a  Parliament  has  been  so  various,  and 
much  of  it,  in  former  times,  so  remotely  related  to 
any  matter  of  industry  or  property,  as  easily  to  sustain 
the  claim  of  disinterested  public  service  on  behalf  of 
its  members.  In  recent  years,  however,  this  assump- 
tion has  become  more  difficult  to  maintain.  This  is 
due  not  so  much  to  any  increased  pressure  of  particu- 
lar business  interests  in  the  field  of  politics  (though 
the  conflicts  round  land  and  licences  have  enforced 
this  aspect  of  the  situation)  as  to  a  marked  advance 
of  general  problems  affecting  industry,  commerce 
and  finance.  What  these  problems  are  we  have 
already  seen.  Inside  Parliament,  the  revival  of 
Protectionism  by  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  followed  by 
trade  union  legislation,  increased  taxation  of  wealth, 
and  a  whole  series  of  "  socialistic  "  measures  and 
proposals  to  secure  insurance  benefits,  higher  wages, 
better  conditions  of  employment,  access  to  the  land 


no         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

and  better  housing,  at  the  expense,  directly  or 
indirectly,  of  the  employers  and  propertied  classes. 
Outside  Parliament  were  the  rapidly  growing  trade- 
union,  socialist  and  syndicalist  movements,  whose 
demands  and  methods  of  asserting  them  presented  a 
challenge,  not  to  this  or  that  trade  or  interest,  but 
to  the  whole  social  order  as  resting  upon  property. 
It  was  a  growing  perception  of  this  situation  which, 
as  we  saw,  before  the  war,  was  welding  the  propertied 
classes,  irrespective  of  the  older  party  traditions,  into 
something  like  a  solid  defence.  It  will  rank  as  a 
curiosity  of  politics  that  this  solidarity  of  property 
first  manifested  itself  in  a  highly  vocal  hatred  of 
Mr.  Lloyd  George.  The  situation  after  the  war  is 
likely  to  bring  fundamental  issues  of  property  into 
still  sharper  prominence,  and  the  consciousness  of 
the  attack  and  the  defence  into  far  clearer  recogni- 
tion. For  the  experiences  of  the  war,  military  and 
civil,  must  be  a  forcing  process  in  "  real  politics." 
It  will  have  brought  millions  of  workers  and  citizens 
in  this  and  other  lands  to  taste  for  the  first  time  of  the 
tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  i.e.  to  realize 
the  truth  about  the  structure  of  a  society  in  which 
the  whole  fabric  of  material  and  moral  civilization,  in- 
volving the  lives  of  countless  millions  of  the  common 
people,  can  be  brought  to  ruin  by  the  misguided  will 
of  tiny  groups  of  men  at  governing  centres  over 
whom  the  common  people  have  no  control.  If  they 
pursue  their  study  of  the  structure  of  their  national 
society,  they  will  come  to  understand  how  it  is  that 
the  peoples  are  prevented  from  having  any  real  control 
over  these  tiny  groups  of  men.  They  will  recognize 
that  between  them  and  their  real  governors  there  is 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  in 

a  great  gulf  fixed,  the  gulf  of  improperly,  the  power 
of  the  classes,  which  requires  militarism,  Protection- 
ism, Imperialism,  the  absolute  State  and  the  politics 
of  international  antagonism. 

This  growing  consciousness  on  both  sides  of  the 
increasing  part  to  be  played  by  the  struggle  for  and 
against  existing  property  institutions  and  industrial 
control,  must  visibly  affect  the  structure  of  politics 
after  the  war.  Regarded  from  the  standpoint  of  a 
union  of  the  forces  of  reaction — our  immediate  object 
of  consideration — this  will  not  make  politics  the 
plainly  conscious  class  war  which  many  Socialists 
have  urged  and  desired  The  propertied  classes  will 
not  go  into  politics  merely  as  selfish  defenders  of 
their  own  interests.  They  will  contrive  to  conceal 
and  to  decorate  their  underlying  and  directing  prin- 
ciple with  sentiments  and  policies  of  a  disinterested 
or  idealist  character.  Military  conscription,  in  which 
the  master  class,  as  officers,  imposes  discipline  upon 
the  working  class  as  rank  and  file,  will  still  appear 
to  them  as  a  salutary  "  national  service  "  to  which 
each  class  of  citizens  contributes  its  "  proper  "  share. 
Compulsory  arbitration  for  industrial  disputes,  in 
which  the  final  judgment  will  rest  with  an  official  or 
a  nominee  of  the  distinctively  capitalist  State,  will 
be  defended  as  a  necessary  safeguard  of  social  order. 
Protectionism  will  be  the  scientific  conservation  of 
national  resources,  a  security  of  full  employment  for 
the  workers  and  a  defence  against  the  invasion  of  our 
markets  by  foreigners.  Imperialism  will  be  the  exten- 
sion of  honest  and  efficient  Government  over  the 
backward  countries  of  the  earth  for  the  benefit  of 
the  weaker  peoples.     Even  those  processes  of  broaden- 


112         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

ing  the  basis  of  taxation,  by  which  the  propertied 
classes   will   seek   to   shift   the   burden    from    their 
shoulders,  will  contrive  to  appear  as  a  wholesome 
education   of   the   public   in   the   responsibilities   of 
government.     This  way  of  stating  the  case  may  seem 
to  be  an  imputation  of  hypocrisy.     But  it  is  no  such 
thing.     It   is  merely  the   subconscious   cunning  by 
which  the  more  selfish  motives  hide  their  operations 
behind  more  creditable  and  more  generous  motives 
which   they   find   or   fabricate.     Politicians,    philan- 
thropists, intellectualists,  moralists,  and  theologians 
are   continually   engaged   in   spinning   theories    and 
inventing  formulas  that  are  serviceable  for  this  end. 
Biologists  discover  theories  of  the  utility  of  a  struggle 
between  individuals  and  species  as  a  mode  of  natural 
selection  conducive  to  progress.  Political  philosophers 
build  up  theories  of  the  absolutism  of  the  State  in 
its  relation  to  other  States  or  to  its  subjects.     Econo- 
mists furnish  reasons  to  show  how  the  current  distri- 
bution of  wealth  proceeds  by  "  laws  "  fixed  in  the 
nature  of  things,  with  which  it  will  be  mischievous 
for  either  legislation  or  proletarian  organization  to 
interfere.     Moralists    and    philanthropists    indicate 
reforms  of  personal  character  and  habits  of  life  as  the 
only  valid   means   of    progress,   and   depreciate  en- 
vironmental changes  as  savouring  of  "  materialism." 
Spiritual    teachers    have    always    reprobated    class 
dissensions  and  the  concentration  of  men's  thoughts 
upon    "  the    things   of   this   world."     Thinkers   and 
moralists  are,  of  course,  not  occupied  for  the  most 
part  in  finding  intellectual  and  spiritual  defences  for 
"  the  existing  order."     Nor  do  such  fruits  of  theory 
as  I  cite  form  the  staple  of  their  thinking.     Most 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  113 

thinkers  are  honestly  employed  in  trying  to  discover 
facts  and  state  laws  in  the  department  of  inquiry  in 
which  they  are  engaged.  Most  social  reformers  are 
sincerely  devoted  to  their  "  cause  "  and  to  the  popular 
welfare  which  they  believe  it  to  serve.  But  the  full 
admission  of  this  disinterested  conduct  does  not  one 
whit  impair  the  truth  that  all  these  modes  of  intel- 
lectual activity  are  actually  exploited  in  the  interests 
of  the  powerful  ruling  classes.  In  the  world  of 
thought  and  action  an  immense  output  of  new 
thoughts,  theories  and  experiments  is  continually 
taking  place.  These  thoughts,  theories  and  experi- 
ments continually  press  upon  the  general  mind, 
competing  for  acceptance  and  support.  A  constant 
selection  and  rejection  goes  on.  What  determines 
which  ideas  are  selected,  adopted,  elaborated  and 
become  orthodox,  and  which  ideas  fail  ?  Not  wholly, 
and  not  chiefly,  their  inherent  truth  or  value.  In 
all  thoughts  or  actions  calculated  to  affect  vested 
interests  of  power  or  property  these  interests  exercise 
a  rigorous  selection.  Ideas  favourable  to  them  receive 
recognition  and  flourish,  ideas  unfavourable  wither 
and  perish.  No  doubt,  truth  has  what  may  be  called 
an  absolute  survival  value.  Crushed  once,  it  has  a 
constant  tendency  to  reappear  and,  waiting  for  a 
favourable  opportunity,  to  win  acceptance.  But 
this  economy  of  intellectual  progress  is  greatly 
impaired  by  the  biased  process  of  selection. 

Two  instances,  one  from  the  province  of  political 
theory,  one  from  economics,  may  serve  for  illustration. 
The  theory  of  the  absolute  and  forceful  State, 
animated  by  a  will  for  power,  which  constitutes  the 
heart  of  "Prussianism,"  was  adopted  and  propagated 

8 


H4         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

in  Germany  by  the  favourable  selection  and  cultiva- 
tion of  one  variety  of  philosophic  dogma  out  of  a 
welter  of  competing  speculations.  Though  the  idealist 
teaching  of  the  first  of  the  modern  German  philoso- 
phers, Kant,  may  have  contained  the  hidden  seeds 
of  that  romantic  selfishness  which  on  a  larger  collective 
scale  was  to  yield  the  doctrine  of  an  absolute  State, 
Kant  himself  had  no  such  conscious  purpose.  His 
thought,  nourished  on  the  one  side  by  the  scepticism 
of  Hume,  on  the  other  by  the  stress  of  Protestantism 
upon  the  right  of  private  judgment  and  the  central 
significance  of  the  individual  will,  envisaged  man  far 
less  as  the  member  of  a  State  than  as  a  unit  of  Human- 
ity. In  Kant,  as  in  his  great  contemporary  Goethe, 
the  cosmopolitan  spirit  of  culture  was  paramount. 
But,  as  soon  as  the  urgent  practical  need  arose  for  a 
stimulation  of  militant  nationalism  to  throw  off  the 
Napoleonic  yoke  and  to  build  a  strong  Teutonic 
State,  Kantian  idealism  showed  a  great  adaptability, 
through  the  interpretation  of  Fichte  and  others,  to 
the  intellectual  demand.  Hegel,  the  subtlest  and 
most  enthusiastic  of  spiritual  tools,  soon  succeeded 
in  fastening  the  authority  of  the  absolute  State  as 
the  centre  of  the  rational  universe  and  the  supreme 
director  of  human  conduct.  Romantic  egoistic  ideal- 
ism, thus  "  writ  large  "  in  the  Prussian  State,  gave 
a  sanction  of  intellectual  culture  to  the  practical 
ambitions,  projects  and  achievements  of  a  powerful 
State.  This  State  was  in  effect  a  moral  as  well  as  a 
political  "  absolute/'  owning  no  real  obligations  either 
of  law  or  of  humanity  to  other  States.  In  all  relations 
with  other  States  these  latter  were  merely  instruments 
in   the   pursuance   of    its   supreme   purposes.     The 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  115 

State  was  also  "  absolute  M  in  its  control  over  the 
lives,  the  wills,  the  property  of  its  individual  citizens, 
who,  as  social  beings,  were  to  find  their  perfect  free- 
dom only  in  voluntary  submission  to  the  will  of  the 
State.  Such  was  the  doctrine  required  by  the  makers 
of  modern  Germany.  In  order  that  the  "  intellec- 
tuals "  who  were  to  serve  it  up  and  impose  it  on  the 
national  mind  might  not  appear  to  themselves  merely 
abject  instruments,  some  liberty  in  modifying  and 
embroidering  the  hard  outlines  of  the  theory  was 
permissible.  But  none  the  less  it  remains  true  that 
all  attempts  of  other  more  liberal  and  humanitarian 
theories  to  dispute  the  dogma  of  State  absolutism 
have  been  suppressed  in  favour  of  an  intellectual 
orthodoxy  firmly  planted  in  the  seats  of  academic 
authority  and  supported  by  the  official  and  intellec- 
tual world.  How  should  it  be  otherwise  ?  Where 
clear  and  important  purposes  animate  the  ruling  and 
possessing  classes,  the  competition  of  ideas  in  the 
world  of  thought  can  never  be  free  :  the  selection, 
rejection  and  combination  will  always  be  directed 
to  the  support,  not  of  disinterested  truth,  but  of 
such  "  truths "  as  help  those  who  control  the 
State. 

How  clearly  we  see  this  exploitation  of  political 
theory  in  Germany.  But  is  the  process  peculiarly 
German  ?  Are  not  the  same  seeds  of  State  absolutism 
visible  both  in  the  practice  and  the  theory  of  other 
nations,  and  are  they  not  nourished  by  a  similar 
process  of  authoritative  selection  ?  There  is  nothing 
peculiarly  German  in  the  theory  of  the  absolute  State. 
The  ancient  doctrine  found  its  most  uncompromising 
modern  revival  in  the  "  Leviathan  "  of  the  English 


n6        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

philosopher  Thomas  Hobbes,  and  a  century  later  a 
Frenchman,  Rousseau,  essayed  to  lay  a  democratic 
basis  for  the  dogma  by  developing  the  idea  of  the 
supremacy  of  "  the  general  will,"  an  idea  which  Hegel 
skilfully  perverted  to  the  purposes  of  autocracy. 
But  the  demands  of  the  actual  situation  in  Britain 
and  France  were  not  equally  favourable  to  a  clear 
conception  of  an  omnipotent  and  absolute  State. 
The  traditions  and  the  needs  of  Britain  have  never 
favoured  close  theorizing  upon  the  nature  of  the 
State  or  upon  any  political  foundations,  nor  have  the 
social  and  economic  interests  of  the  ruling  classes 
hitherto  supported  the  practical  development  of  a 
strong,  highly  centralized  State.  English  Liberalism, 
the  dominant  factor  in  the  moulding  of  politics  during 
recent  generations,  has  thrown  the  stress  upon  indivi- 
dual liberty  and  private  enterprise.  Though  French 
political  conditions  have  been  more  favourable  to  a 
powerful  centralized  Government,  the  more  severely 
practical  character  of  the  French  and  their  republican 
institutions  have  not  yielded  a  spirit  of  wholehearted 
and  enthusiastic  submission  to  the  State  as  a  com- 
manding super-personality.  But  other  countries  enjoy 
no  immunity  from  the  Prussian  conception  of  the 
State.  So  far  as  international  relations  are  con- 
cerned, that  conception  has  been  little  more  than  a 
somewhat  rigorous  formulation  of  the  hitherto  pre- 
vailing attitude  of  all  powerful  States  towards  one 
another.1  The  German  repudiation  of  international 
law  under  the  alleged  pressure  of  necessity,  though 

1  See  Mr.  G.  Lowes  Dickinson's  "  European  Anarchy  "  (Allen 
&  Unwin,  Ltd.)  for  a  full  and  convincing  exposition  of  this 
thesis. 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  117 

more  naked  in  avowal,  merely  reflects  the  supremacy 
of  State  interests  which  has  been  the  guiding  principle 
in  all  diplomacy.  This  clearer  consciousness  and 
fuller  theorizing  of  the  situation  among  German 
statesmen  and  thinkers  belong  to  the  greater  intellec- 
tual naivete  of  a  nation  that  believes  in  organized 
rather  than  free  thought.  As  our  thinkers  come  to 
reflect  upon  the  actual  position  of  their  nation,  in  a 
dangerous  world  where  no  sanctioned  government 
exists,  they,  too,  come  easily  and  quickly  to  yield  the 
same  intellectual  and  moral  support  to  the  concept 
of  a  State  absolute  in  its  claim  upon  its  subjects  and 
free  from  any  ultimately  binding  obligations  to  other 
States.  Every  State  which  desires  to  formulate  a 
final  principle  or  criterion  of  conduct  falls  back  upon 
its  own  self-interest.  Salus  republics  suprema  lex. 
The  experience  of  war  has  sharpened  our  self-con- 
sciousness in  this  matter,  and  has  brought  into  the 
foreground  of  thought  and  feeling  ideas  and  emotions 
which  formerly  were  clouded  in  an  atmosphere  of 
humanitarian  sentimentalism.  As  soon  as  we  seem 
to  require  the  Prussian  conception  of  the  State,  in 
order  to  assist  our  improved  adoption  of  the  Prussian 
practice,  we  also  find  our  sociologists  and  philosophers 
ready  to  supply  the  need.  Our  neo-Hegelians  in 
Oxford  and  elsewhere  had  not  been  remiss  in  adopting 
and  applying  to  the  purposes  of  our  nation  and  Empire 
the  characteristic  features  of  the  German  State 
theory,1  and  during  the  war  their  teaching,  narrowly 
confined  in  its  early  appeal,  has  been  spread  broadcast 
in  our  universities,  our  churches  and  our  patriotic 

1  See    Mr.   L.   T.    Hobhouse's  "  Democracy  and   Reaction  '• 
(Fisher  Unwin). 


n8        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

Press.1  It  may  not,  indeed,  be  easy  to  engage  the 
general  mind  of  our  people  in  the  misty  metaphysics 
of  the  State,  but  much  can  and  will  be  done  in  our 
seats  of  learning  and  our  popular  Press  to  mobilize 
history,  biology,  civics  and  political  economy,  in 
order  to  teach  our  people  to  "  think  imperially  M  and 
to  submit  to  those  changes  in  our  political  and  indus- 
trial institutions  which  conduce  towards  a  self-poised 
and  self-centred  imperial  State. 

The  other  example  which  I  adduce  to  illustrate  the 
process  of  artificial  selection  by  which  theories  and 
formulas  are  made  subservient  to  the  needs  and 
purposes  of  dominant  classes  in  society  is  furnished 
by  the  development  of  the  "  classical "  political 
economy  in  Great  Britain. 

The  liberal  analysis  of  industry  and  commerce 
presented  by  Adam  Smith  in  his  "  Wealth  of  Nations  " 
supplied  the  material  for  at  least  two  very  different 
principles  of  economic  conduct.  His  exposition  of 
the  advantages  of  free  competition  and  laissez-faire 
in  directing  industry  and  commerce  into  channels 
by  which  enlightened  self-interest  conduced  to  the 
maximum  production  of  wealth  and  general  well- 
being,  afforded  logical  supports  for  the  liberation  of 
internal  industry  and  foreign  trade  from  the  artificial 
hindrances  of  legal  monopolies,   trade  conspiracies, 

1  Here  is  the  pure  milk  of  Prussianism  from  the  mouth  of 
Professor  Sir  Henry  Jones  in  a  speech  delivered,  Mayii9i6,  at 
Bangor : — 

"He  claimed  that  the  State  had  a  right  to  compel,  provided 
that  it  stood  for  its  own  welfare.  //  owned  us,  we  belonged  to  it. 
We  derived  the  very  substance  of  our  soul  from  the  organized 
community  in  which  we  lived  and  which  we  called  the  State." 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  119 

labour  combinations,  the  law  of  settlement,  protective 
tariffs,  and  other  restraints  upon  the  free  direction 
of  industry  and  commerce  by  the  capitalist  class. 
On  the  other  hand,  his  enunciation  of  the  doctrine 
of  labour  as  the  source  of  value,  his  exposure  of  the 
parasitic  part  of  the  landlord  and  of  M  the  mean 
rapacity,  the  monopolizing  spirit  of  merchants  and 
manufacturers,  who  neither  are  nor  ought  to  be  the 
rulers  of  mankind/'  could  easily  be  made  the  basis  of 
a  revolutionary  labour  economics.  In  the  early 
decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  a  vigorous  advance 
of  economic  thinking  took  place  in  these  opposed 
directions.  The  Owenite  and  early  Socialistic  analyses 
and  proposals  presented  a  powerful  and  various 
challenge  to  the  theory  and  accepted  practice  of  the 
capitalist  control  of  industry  for  private  profit, 
anticipating  almost  all  the  valid  criticism  of  the  later 
socialism.1  But  in  the  struggle  for  survival  in  the 
world  of  thought  the  laissez-faire  capitalism  enjoyed 
the  immense  advantage  of  the  support  of  the 
universities,  the  rising  moneyed  Liberal  party  and 
their  Press,  and  of  the  energetic  representatives 
of  the  new  manufacturing  interests.  The  combina- 
tion of  bankers,  cotton  spinners  and  well-to-do  Whig 
philosophers  easily  secured  the  seats  of  intellectual 
authority  for  a  political  economy  which  presented 
economic  processes  from  the  exclusive  standpoint  of 
the  capitalistic  and  employing  classes.  The  whole 
theory  of  distribution  and  consumption  was  audaci- 
ously distorted  into  an  abject  subordination  to  a 

1  See  Introduction  by  Professor  Foxwell  to  Menger's  "The 
Right  to  the  Whole  Product  of  Labour  "  for  an  account  of  these 
buried  books. 


120         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

theory  of  production,  in  which  saving  and  the 
strengthening  of  the  fund  of  capital,  from  which  the 
employment,  wages  and  subsistence  of  the  workers 
were  derived,  became  the  all-important  conditions  of 
prosperity.  Although  in  later  generations  this  crude 
doctrine  of  a  wages-fund,  limiting  the  subsistence  of 
labour  and  invalidating  the  efficacy  of  trade-unionism 
(the  implicit  purpose  of  the  whole  theory),  has  been 
submitted  to  various  modifications,  the  central 
features  of  the  original  design  still  remain.  The 
laissez-faire  assumption,  and  its  implication  that  the 
wage-earner  tends  to  get  all  he  is  worth  and  that  he 
can  only  get  more  by  working  harder,  still  stand 
firmly  embedded  in  the  orthodox  economic  teaching 
of  our  academic  economists.  Indeed,  they  have  quite 
recently  invented  and  foisted  into  intellectual  circula- 
tion a  new  support  for  the  old  capitalist  positions, 
entitled  "  the  marginal  theory  of  value,"  resting 
ultimately  upon  the  false  assumption  that  the  capital 
and  labour  in  the  actual  economic  world  consist  of 
infinitely  divisible  and  absolutely  fluid  and  inter- 
changeable units.  This  false  mathematical  concep- 
tion has  been  authoritatively  selected  for  the  new 
corner-stone  of  a  theory  of  value,  in  order  to  buttress 
up  the  fortress  of  capitalism  against  the  assaults  of 
the  labour  movement.  That  this  is  not  the  clear 
intention  of  the  clever  economists  who  have  supplied 
the  required  doctrine  may  well  be  admitted.  But 
the  reason  why  this  theory  survives  and  flourishes, 
while  other  competing  theories  fail,  is  not  the  superior 
measure  of  truth  it  contains,  but  its  adaptability  to 
the  intellectual  requirements  of  the  classes  who  con- 
trol, not  industry  alone,  but  the  intellectual  apparatus 


POLITICAL  REACTIONISTS  121 

of  the  nation.  That  he  who  pays  the  piper  calls 
the  tune  is  a  maxim  as  applicable  in  the  intellectual 
as  in  other  worlds,  though  the  transmission  of  the 
"  call  "  is  more  intricate.  Sometimes  those  who  pay 
the  piper  change  the  tune.  This  is  happening  in  our 
economic  policy.  Many  of  our  organized  influential 
business  men  no  longer  see  their  advantage  in  Free 
Trade  and  an  open  door  :  they  call  for  protective 
tariffs  and  a  closed  imperial  preserve  for  their  trade 
and  their  investments.  They  stand  no  longer  for 
competitive  enterprise,  but  for  syndicates  and  com- 
binations with  regulated  outputs,  apportioned  markets 
and  price  agreements.  They  are  prepared  for  the 
abandonment  of  individual  private  bargaining  with 
labour,  hoping  to  substitute  the  control  of  a  capitalist 
State,  with  machinery  for  fixing  wage  rates  and  other 
conditions  of  employment  and  for  a  compulsory  settle- 
ment of  trade  disputes  which  shall  secure  them  peace 
with  profit. 

Organization  is  the  key-note  of  the  new  national 
or  imperial  economy  which  finds  no  lack  of  intellectual 
exponents  of  the  bureaucratic  Socialism  it  involves. 
The  motive  of  the  new  business  economy  is  plain  ; 
it  is  to  purchase  enlarged  productivity  and  improved 
discipline  from  labour  with  a  small  portion  of  the 
increased  yield  of  wealth.  Competitive  profiteering  is 
to  yield  place  to  combined  profiteering  under  the  pro- 
tection of  a  State  which  profiteers  control.  The  next 
few  years  will  witness  a  plentiful  crop  of  political  and 
economic  theories  in  support  of  this  design.  Rich 
business  men  will  endow  departments  in  the  universi- 
ties of  our  industrial  centres  for  research  in  scientific 
management,    trade-boards,    industrial    arbitration, 


122         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

profit-sharing,  State  aids  for  new  industries,  "  key  " 
industries,  trading  banks,  subsidized  transport,  and 
various  other  schemes  for  harmonizing  capitalist 
control  with  submissive  labour  and  a  powerful 
bureaucratic  State.  These  central  motives  of  organi- 
zation and  discipline,  economic  and  political,  will  be 
pervasive  in  our  educational  system.  All  loose  ideas 
of  liberty  and  equality  will  be  drilled  out  of  our  people 
from  the  kindergarten  upwards.  Our  young  will  be 
prepared  for  a  more  strenuous  and  a  better  regulated 
life  than  that  of  their  parents.  They  will  be  better 
reared,  better  trained  and  taught,  better  disciplined 
and  better  sorted  out  for  their  specially  appointed 
work  in  a  highly  subdivided  industrial  hierarchy, 
always  manned  in  its  higher  grades  by  officials  who 
are  members  of  the  ruling  and  propertied  classes, 
with  a  sufficient  admixture  of  declasse  workers  to 
conceal  the  nakedness  of  the  class  rule. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS 

But  these  formal  processes  of  thought  are  by  no 
means  the  only  or  the  most  powerful  intellectual  and 
emotional  supports  of  reaction.  In  our  brief  prelimi- 
nary survey  we  saw  from  what  various  sources  the 
strength  of  militarism  was  derived.  We  saw  how  the 
spirit  of  authority  and  enforced  discipline,  the  regi- 
mentation of  the  mind  and  conduct,  implicit  in  our 
Churches,  our  Public  Schools  and  our  bureaucracy, 
recognized  a  kindred  spirit  in  the  ritual,  the  hierarchy, 
the  uniform,  the  route  march  or  processional,  the  sub- 
mission of  private  will  to  higher  orders  and  esprit  de 
corps,  the  austere  strenuousness  of  the  soldierly  life, 
as  presented  to  their  sympathetic  imagination. 
Pacifists,  led  astray  by  the  lure  of  paradox,  err  when 
they  represent  Christian  ministers  as  the  victims  of 
a  secret  blood-lust.  It  is  true  that  nowhere  do  mili- 
tarism and  war  find  a  more  wholehearted  support 
than  in  the  country  rectory,  unless  it  be  the  Wesleyan 
pulpit.  But  this  is  chiefly  due  to  two  characteristics 
of  the  spiritual  official.  First,  a  high  sense  of  order  and 
uniformity,  as  illustrated  in  the  church  service  and 
the  class  behaviour  of  the  village  school,  and  affect- 
ing all  his  outlook  upon  life  with  a  tinge  of  authori- 
tativeness    and    rigour.     His   intellectual,    economic 

123 


124        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

and  social  conditions  conspire  to  make  him  hostile 
to  liberty  and  democracy.  Religion,  concerned  as  it 
rightly  is  with  trying  to  give  intelligent  and  emotional 
expression  to  the  relation  of  man  to  the  governing  and 
unifying  power  or  purpose  in  the  universe,  has  deeper 
need  for  the  free  development  of  thought  and  feeling 
than  any  other  interest  of  man.  Nowhere  else  are 
restraints  upon  intellectual  liberty  more  injurious 
and  more  demoralizing.  The  inward  bondage  to  a 
creed,  immutable  and  authoritative,  and  the  external 
bondage  to  a  Church,  which  by  its  two  dead  hands 
of  endowment  and  legal  status  imposes  orthodoxy, 
involve  not  only  the  fact  but  the  feeling  of  spiritual 
servitude  for  all  who  have  a  natural  capacity  for 
independent  thought.  This  has  two  results.  First 
it  selects  for  the  ministry  men  with  an  easy  aptitude 
for  conformity,  possessing  neither  the  capacity  nor 
the  desire  to  treat  the  spiritual  life  as  an  adventure 
and  a  progress.  Secondly,  it  has  a  worse  effect  upon 
the  minority  who  do  naturally  possess  or  discover 
some  power  of  criticism  and  of  spiritual  change.  For 
it  subjects  them  to  the  deadliest  and  most  degrading 
of  temptations,  the  denial  of  free  expression  to  the 
inconvenient  and  disturbing  questions  which  announce 
each  process  of  spiritual  creation  within  the  human 
soul.  Worse  still,  it  generates  a  casuistic  aptitude 
for  playing  tricks  with  creeds  and  rites,  so  as  to  furnish 
some  secret  and  limited  satisfaction  for  new  thoughts 
and  higher  criticism  without  imperilling  unduly 
their  reputation  for  orthodoxy.  This  double  life  is 
more  degrading  than  the  sheer  inertia  of  the  majority. 
For  it  corrupts  the  inner  springs  of  spiritual  life — it 
is  u  the  lie  in  the  soul."     Both  types  of  cleric  are 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    125 

enemies  of  progress,  both  are  in  the  last  resort 
defenders  of  the  status  quo  in  politics,  industry  and 
other  social  institutions,  as  in  religion.  Both  may  be 
trusted  in  the  last  resort  to  rally  round  the  flag  of 
property,  respectability,  political  class  rule  and  the 
militarism  which  is  its  last  weapon.  But,  whereas 
the  former,  the  ordinary  country  rector  or  the  narrow 
type  of  Nonconformist  minister,  is  openly  intolerant 
of  free  thinking  in  any  field  of  thought,  and  avowedly 
sympathetic  with  the  doctrines  and  practices  of 
political  and  economic  masterhood,  the  latter  pursues, 
in  his  external  path,  as  in  his  spiritual,  a  more  subtle 
art  of  management.  As  Liberal  or  Christian  Socialist, 
he  often  woos  political  democracy  and  evinces 
sympathy  with  labour  movements  and  schemes  of 
economic  reconstruction  in  which  philanthropy  and 
trusteeship  shall  herald  a  new  age  of  gilds  and  co- 
operative enterprise  under  the  suzerainty  of  a  Catholic 
Church  restored  to  its  proper  seat  of  spiritual  authority 
in  a  reformed  society.  But,  with  rare  exceptions, 
such  priests  are  enemies  of  individual  liberty  of 
thought.  Their  real  reliance  is  upon  some  mystical 
Communion  of  a  Church,  and  this  Church,  in  order 
to  retain  its  social  prestige  and  its  external  influence, 
must  stand  by  and  furnish  spiritual  aid  and  con- 
solation to  the  powers  that  be. 

Among  the  clergy  of  the  State  Church  there  are, 
however,  other  emotional  and  social  attachments  to 
the  circle  of  reaction  of  a  more  personal  order.  The 
rectory  exhibits  an  unusually  developed  sentiment  of 
Imperialism  to  which  many  diverse  currents  of  feeling 
contribute :  imprimis,  a  cultivated  sympathy  with  a 
ruling    caste    engaged    in    spreading    and    imposing 


126        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

civilized  government  upon  backward  peoples,  sancti- 
fied by  considerations  of  missionary  enterprise  and 
endowed  with  powerful  personal  interests  through 
sons  in  the  Navy  or  the  Indian  Civil  Service,  or  else- 
where engaged  in  "  empire-building."  This  sentiment 
is  kept  in  high  vitality  by  the  fuller  opportunities  of 
expression  afforded  by  the  pulpit  and  the  ordinary 
conversation  of  the  recognized  local  exponent  of  the 
higher  life. 

Public  School  masters  come  within  the  same 
spiritual  category.  Many  are  clergy,  and  most  of  the 
sentimental  influences  favourable  to  militarism  are 
common  to  both  professions.  Moreover,  successful 
school-masters  in  our  existing  educational  system  are 
commonly  men  of  dominant  and  aggressive  person- 
ality, engaged  consciously  in  an  attempt  to  stamp 
their  intellectual  and  moral  image  upon  their  staff  and 
their  pupils.  They  are  "  warring  "  against  ignorance, 
vice,  slackness  and  ill  manners,  and  striving  to  impose 
a  ■'  standard  "  of  personality  upon  large  numbers  of 
human  beings  whose  natural  diversities  they  have 
neither  the  time,  the  inclination  nor  the  intelligence  to 
study.  What  wonder  that  the  schoolmaster  should 
welcome  military  drill  as  an  accomplice  in  his  wider 
purpose,  and  should  punch  history  into  shapes  that 
appeal  to  patriotic  pride  and  feed  pugnacity  !  The 
clergy  and  the  schoolmasters  are  the  chief  middlemen 
who  convey  into  the  general  mind  the  warped  and 
selected  "  facts  "  and  judgments  served  out  to  them 
under  the  title  of  "  history "  by  college  dons  or 
intellectual  outsiders  whose  professional  interests 
and  personal  proclivities  unite  to  enlist  them  in  this 
branch  of  "  national  service."     Nothing  in  the  annals 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    127 

of  intellectualism  is  more  disconcerting  than  the 
"  easy  virtue  "  of  many  professional  historians  who, 
though  aware  of  the  extreme  difficulty  of  verification 
of  facts  and  their  just  interpretation  even  in  the 
calmest  and  most  leisurely  atmosphere,  have  been 
eager  to  prostitute  their  reputations  to  the  most 
violent  ex  parte  presentations  of  current  political 
events  and  motives. 

Journalism  is  often  explained  as  the  mere  mercenary 
of  reaction.  In  war  and  other  national  emergencies 
the  Press,  definitely  "  capitalist "  in  interest  and 
control,  becomes  here  as  elsewhere  a  machine  of 
government,  pumping  into  the  general  mind  whatever 
news  or  opinions  are  convenient  to  the  authorities. 
But  while  the  capitalist  control  gives  a  permanent 
support  to  the  reactionary  alliance,  it  should  be  recog- 
nized that  powerful  independent  influences  work 
in  the  same  direction.  In  ordinary  times,  political 
and  industrial  strife,  crime,  competitive  sport  and 
gambling,  together  with  the  vulgar  and  expensive 
personal  display  of  u  high  society/'  form  the  staple  of 
the  news  columns  and  feed  the  separatist  and  com- 
bative instincts.  In  periods  of  grave  internal  or  inter- 
national conflict,  our  newspapers  live  by  stimulating 
hatred  and  revenge,  fear,  envy  and  suspicion,  using  a 
licence  of  invention,  suppression  and  perversion  of 
facts  accommodated  to  the  ignorance  and  credulity  of 
their  public.  Lord  Morley  once  described  the  Press 
as  "  a  perpetual  engine  for  keeping  discussion  on  a 
low  level. ' '  But  in  times  like  these,  it  aims  at  stopping 
the  whole  process  of  discussion  and  keeping  thought 
and  feeling  on  the  lowest  level.  It  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  the  popular  Press  has  gone  far  towards 


128         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

destroying  the  human  value  of  two  generations  of 
popular  education  by  turning  the  three  R's  and  their 
miserable  adjuncts  to  the  most  degrading  uses.  To 
charge  it  with  a  conscious  conspiracy  to  capture  and 
degrade  the  popular  mind,  so  as  to  weaken  all  popular 
movements  of  political  and  economic  reform,  would 
be,  however,  to  misrepresent  the  workings  of  the 
forces  of  reaction.  No  such  clear  purpose  animates 
the  owners  and  controllers  of  our  Press.  The  degrad- 
ing work  they  do  is  the  product  of  a  number  of  separ- 
ate considerations  never  gathered  into  any  unity 
of  purpose.  It  is  a  labour  of  "  undesigned  coinci- 
dence/' Some  of  the  influences  which  operate  from 
the  business  world  are  indeed  well  recognized.  The 
veto  of  the  advertising  manager  over  the  whole  policy 
of  a  modern  newspaper,  which  lives  upon  advertise- 
ments, is  very  real.  It  operates  both  generally  and 
in  particulars.  The  interests  of  owners  of  certain 
kinds  of  property  may  be  seriously  injured  by  public 
criticism,  or  by  political  proposals  for  legal  restric- 
tions, taxation  or  other  public  interference.  If  the 
businesses  connected  with  such  property  are  large 
advertisers,  it  is  easy  to  perceive  how  their  pressure 
is  imposed  on  the  news  and  editorial  matter  of  news- 
papers. Every  journalist  knows  that  a  strong  attack 
upon  the  drink  trade  or  drugs,  and  in  higher  class 
journalism  upon  motors,  insurance  companies  or 
landed  property,  will  get  him  into  trouble  with  the 
management,  while  a  capable  defence  of  these 
moneyed  interests  will  be  profitable  business  for  his 
paper  when  advertising  contracts  are  renewed.  The 
control  of  the  advertiser  over  the  less  scrupulous 
organs,  of  course,  is  often  more  direct.     Where  news 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    129 

and  editorial  assistance  in  support  of  some  financial 
operation  are  directly  purchasable,  we  have  corrup- 
tion in  its  crudest  form.  Upon  the  Continent, 
especially  in  France,  high  finance  thus  operates  upon 
the  business  columns  of  otherwise  highly  reputable 
papers,  and  even  in  this  country  revelations  of  similar 
procedure  from  time  to  time  are  made  in  the  law 
courts.  But  the  general  body  of  this  pressure  is 
informal,  and  ill-recognized  even  by  Press  managers 
and  editors.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  in  this 
country  newspapers  would  enter  into  such  contracts 
with  a  drug-trade  syndicate  as  were  disclosed  a  few 
years  ago  by  an  enterprising  "  weekly  "  in  America, 
when  the  contracting  newspapers  undertook  as  an 
express  stipulation  that  no  matter  of  news  or  comment 
unfavourable  to  the  drug  trade  should  appear  in 
their  columns.  Perhaps  the  drug  trade  here  is  not 
so  strongly  organized  or  its  advertising  so  lucrative 
as  in  the  drug-ridden  United  States.  Our  Press  would 
not  with  one  accord  abstain  from  reporting  a  most 
sensational  Parliamentary  debate  upon  a  Bill  to 
restrict  the  sale  of  dangerous  or  demoralizing  drugs, 
as  was  the  case  with  a  measure  introduced  into  the 
Massachusetts  Assembly.  But  in  this  as  in  other 
matters  where  profitable  advertising  is  affected,  most 
of  our  newspapers  would  tread  delicately.  Co- 
operating with  such  specific  pressures  of  business 
interests  is  the  general  influence  of  capitalism,  as 
represented  by  the  investments  and  other  business 
attachments  of  the  directors  and  large  shareowners 
of  newspapers,  which  are  in  themselves  great  capitalist 
concerns.  Agitations  and  reforms  which  shake  the 
confidence  of  the  propertied  classes  and  give  a  sense 

9 


130        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

of  insecurity  to  wealth  must  expect  to  have  the  active 
opposition  of  almost  all  respectable  newspapers. 
Here  and  there  in  every  country  is  found  a  paper 
which  retains  from  an  earlier  period  the  responsibility 
of  a  disinterested  professional  adviser,  engaged  in 
considering  the  public  welfare,  with  as  little  bias  as 
is  possible  from  the  business  side.  But  most  papers, 
while  striving  to  conserve  the  semblance  of  profes- 
sional character  and  a  policy  of  principle,  are  moulded 
by  the  pressure  of  the  upper  millstone  of  capitalistic 
control  and  the  lower  millstone  of  circulation.  In 
their  attitude  to  their  public  they  are  grocers,  sup- 
plying articles  that  sell.  This  does  not,  however, 
imply  a  merely  servile  attitude  of  supplying  "  what 
the  public  wants."  It  is  theirs  to  stimulate  and  to 
evoke  wants  by  the  sort  of  goods  they  offer.  The 
worst  and  most  unscrupulous  form  of  advertising  is 
theirs.  For  they  are,  more  than  any  other  trade, 
specialists  in  feeding  gullibility.  Hence  the  boldest 
condensation  of  mendacity  and  malignity  is  found  in 
the  newspaper  placard.  The  bill-maker  has  better 
than  any  other  man  gauged  the  depths  of  credulity 
and  emotional  suggestibility,  the  short  memory 
and  the  incapacity  for  criticism,  of  the  average 
reader. 

It  might,  of  course,  appear  that  a  proletarian  Press, 
free  from  the  more  injurious  pressures  of  capitalism, 
would  easily  be  able  to  pursue  a  useful  and  a  profitable 
trade  by  helping  to  organize  the  popular  forces  of 
discontent  against  the  alliance  of  reaction.  For, 
after  all,  the  workers  are  the  vast  majority  of  the 
public,  and  their  interests,  if  they  knew  it,  lie  in  the 
defeat  of  reaction.     How,  then,  does  it  come  about 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    131 

that  even  the  Press  they  read  is  so  often  in  the  active 
service  of  their  enemies  ?  Partly,  no  doubt,  because 
a  daily  paper,  feeding  any  large  public,  is  of  present 
necessity  an  expensive  and  a  risky  enterprise,  requir- 
ing large  capital  and  dependent  therefore  upon  the 
support  of  rich  men.  In  theory,  the  co-operation 
of  the  million  might  furnish  a  sufficient  basis  of 
capital ;  in  practice,  it  cannot,  unless  a  far  more  alert 
and  widespread  appreciation  of  the  need  of  an  inde- 
pendent Press  is  generated.  But  the  chief  cause  of 
betrayal  is  found  in  the  tastes  and  interests  of  the 
mass  of  working-class  readers.  They  have  been 
brought  up  to  want  the  doctored  and  drugged  news, 
the  fierce  appeals  to  hate  and  suspicion,  the  procession 
of  scares  and  horrors,  the  strong  unmeaning  headlines, 
the  bold  false  prophecies.  This  has  been  their  war- 
mind.  In  peace,  the  sport  and  betting  news,  the 
police-court,  the  story  of  adventure,  doings  in  high 
life  and  local  gossip,  eat  away  all  serious  sustained 
interested  in  politics  or  even  in  the  labour  movement. 
The  halfpenny  "  capitalist  "  Press  knows  their  weak- 
nesses :  they  are  its  allies,  it  is  skilled  in  playing  up  to 
them.  I  am  not  blaming  the  working  classes  for  over- 
valuing lighter  recreations  and  not  being  sufficiently 
alive  to  their  deeper  and  more  permanent  interests. 
For  this  attitude  of  mind  is  part  of  the  social  problem 
to  be  solved.  Here  we  meet  it  as  a  factor  in  the 
reactionary  influence  of  the  Press.  But  it  comes 
up  whenever  we  touch  any  specific  problem  of 
reform.  Every  democratic  reform  is  sapped  by 
draining  off  the  potential  interest  and  support  of 
the  workers  into  more  immediately  attractive 
channels. 


132         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

The  most  important  service,  for  instance,  rendered 
by  the  Press  to  the  circle  of  reaction  is  as  caterer  to 
the  amusements  and  distractions  which  divert  the 
mind  from  dangerous  processes  of  thought.  The 
strain  of  a  dull  industrialism  calls  for  strong  "  relief  " 
elements,  easily  accessible  and  making  no  serious 
demands  upon  the  mind.  The  powers  of  reaction 
instinctively  recognize  the  truth  which  Lord  Salisbury 
once  blurted  out  in  recommending  "  circuses  "  as 
the  remedy  for  our  "  present  discontents."  Panem 
et  circenses  may  be  taken  as  the  settled  half-conscious 
policy  of  the  new  capitalist  defence,  translated  into 
broader  terms  of  M  subsistence  wage  and  cheap 
amusements."  The  public-house,  the  music-hall, 
the  pictures,  football,  horseracing  and  betting,  are 
well  recognized  by  labour  leaders  as  the  enemies  of 
really  effective  industrial  and  political  organization 
among  the  workers.  Not  that  these  diversions  are 
in  themselves  subjects  for  condemnation,  but  that 
they  serve  to  eat  away  so  large  a  share  of  the  interest, 
the  leisure  and  the  surplus  income  of  the  workers  as 
to  leave  too  little  for  the  work  of  making  democracy 
a  reality.  This  half-conscious  policy  of  "  doping  " 
thought  by  alleviations  and  distractions  is,  of  course, 
by  no  means  confined  to  the  working  classes.  The 
real  "  mission  of  repentance "  which  is  going  on 
convicts  our  well-to-do  classes  of  the  same  lack  of 
seriousness.  Sport  and  luxurious  living,  excessive 
holidays  and  pleasure-seeking,  easygoing  comfortable 
ways,  have  impaired  our  education,  enfeebled  our 
application  of  science  and  organization  to  industry, 
commerce  and  politics,  and  have  broken  down  the 
domestic  puritanism  which  was  the  backbone  of  our 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    133 

former  economic  supremacy.  Our  spiritual  pastors 
and  masters  are  everywhere  beseeching  us  to  repent 
of  this  national  sin.  The  ruling,  possessing  and 
employing  classes  have  got  to  make  an  effort  to  escape 
the  natural  nemesis  of  parasitism  with  which  the 
phenomenal  display  of  energy  in  Germany  has  for 
the  first  time  confronted  them.  The  problem  is 
how  to  cultivate  the  serious  life  themselves,  without 
getting  too  much  thought  into  the  working-classes. 
For  if  the  worker  becomes  "  like  one  of  us,  knowing 
good  and  evil,"  there  is  likely  to  be  "  ructions." 
It  would  be  foolish  to  suggest  that  this  idea  stands 
out,  or  is  likely  to  stand  out  clearly  in  the  thought 
and  purpose  of  the  governing  and  possessing  classes. 
It  is  essential  to  the  pursuance  of  the  policy  that  it 
should  not  reach  any  clear  stage  of  consciousness, 
but  that  it  should  operate  as  instinctively  as  possible. 
Our  masters  will  not  say  to  themselves,  "  We  must 
keep  popular  education  and  thinking  on  safe  lines 
and  within  safe  limits,  such  as  fits  them  for  efficient 
workers  and  unfits  them  for  '  agitators/  "  But 
they  will  see  that  the  public  money  spent  on  schools 
goes  as  far  as  possible  to  such  scientific  and  technical 
training  as  carries  this  immediate  utility,  and  as 
little  as  possible  into  a  really  "  liberal  education," 
such  as  evokes  free  thought  and  criticism  upon  human 
institutions.  They  will  feel  that  this  is  the  best  thing 
for  the  workers  themselves,  to  give  them  really 
serviceable  information  and  aptitudes,  not  to  fill  up 
their  minds  with  "  mere  ideas." 

Similarly,  they  will  recognize  the  value  of  the  wider 
political  and  philanthropic  policy  of  concessions  and 
emollients,  public  provision  of  insurance  against  the 


134        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

emergencies  and  accidents  of  life,  philanthropic 
services  rendered  out  of  surplus  private  wealth,  with 
encouragement  to  those  distractions  and  human 
weaknesses  of  working-class  life  which  are  not  deemed 
seriously  detrimental  to  the  efficiency  of  labour. 
This  is  where  the  whole  apparatus  of  sport,  drink, 
gambling  and  the  pleasure  trades  "  stands  in  "  with 
the  major  forces  of  reaction. 

Even  the  principals  in  the  Alliance  of  Reaction 
have  no  clear  idea  of  the  co-operation  in  which  they 
are  engaged.  The  Liberal  manufacturers  and  mer- 
chants of  a  generation  ago  understood  very  little  the 
influences  which  were  drawing  them  towards  Conser- 
vatism, Imperialism  and  militarism,  and  now  are 
leading  them  towards  Protectionism.  The  belief 
in,  or  the  belief  in  the  belief  in,  popular  representative 
government  is  still  held  by  politicians  whose  efforts 
are  consistently  directed  against  every  attempt  to 
give  concrete  reality  to  that  government.  In  all  the 
Western  Liberal  Powers  there  is  no  clear  consciousness 
among  the  possessing  and  ruling  classes  that  they  are 
engaged  in  a  warfare  against  democracy,  and  that 
part  of  the  inner  meaning  of  this  war  is  to  strengthen 
the  forces  of  militarism  and  of  class  government  at 
their  disposal  in  their  respective  countries  for  the 
defence  of  their  property  and  power  against  the 
encroachments  of  "  the  people."  Nowhere  among 
the  reactionists  do  we  find  any  open  recognition  of 
a  class  war  or  of  the  deep  fundamental  rifts  of  interest 
between  haves  and  have-nots,  capital  and  labour, 
subjects  and  rulers.  The  struggle  is  conducted  with 
the  lights  turned  down,  and  it  is  a  struggle  in  which 
detail    smothers    principle.     There    is    a    persistent 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    135 

refusal  to  face  the  logic  of  the  situation.  This  refusal 
belongs  to  the  instinctive  cunning  of  the  reactionary 
movement.  Though  the  reactionists  do  not,  of 
course,  perceive  or  admit  that  reason,  justice  and 
humanity  are  against  them,  they  take  every  care  to 
avoid  raising  these  issues,  because  they  have  a  sort 
of  intuition  that  such  appeals  would  tell  against 
them.  It  is  only  in  private  conversation  or  in  the 
relaxation  of  the  club  smoke-room  that  business  men 
speak  their  mind  about  keeping  the  working  classes 
in  their  place,  or  Civil  servants  vent  their  contempt 
alike  for  the  intelligence  and  the  power  of  "  the 
people."  This  absence  of  a  conscious  solidarity  and 
continuity  of  purpose  in  these  principles  of  reaction 
we  have  already  attributed  in  part  to  the  fact  that 
each  has  a  special  outlook  and  interests  of  its  own 
to  serve  and  conceives  itself  as  using  the  others  for 
its  own  ends.  The  simplest  instance  is  the  interplay 
between  the  political  party  leader  and  the  financial 
or  industrial  magnate,  in  which  the  former  blackmails 
the  latter  to  fill  the  party  purse  which  is  his  instrument 
of  political  power  and  personal  importance,  while  the 
latter  views  the  same  transaction  as  one  which  gives 
him  a  hold  upon  the  party  policy,  to  be  converted 
into  tariff-pulls  or  other  business  plunder.  Similarly, 
on  the  wider  plane,  with  the  conspiracy  between  the 
Foreign  Office  and  the  group  of  bankers  or  concession- 
naires,  the  former  seeking  to  promote  or  to  strengthen 
some  political  entente  or  to  check  the  political  scheme 
of  another  Power,  the  latter  out  for  a  lucrative  loan 
or  a  profitable  railroad  enterprise.  This  difference 
in  the  direct  purpose  of  the  co-operative  forces 
conceals  the  meaning  and  obscures  the  actual  facts 
of  the  co-operation. 


136        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

Still  more  is  this  the  case  when  we  are  dealing  with 
the  auxiliary  and  the  secondary  forces  of  reaction. 
The   leading   auxiliary,    as  we   have   recognized,    is 
militarism.     Only  on  its  trade  side  do  we  rightly 
detect  any  clear  consciousness  of  a  wider  policy,  and 
even  that  is  limited  in  scope.  The  armament  industries 
do  exhibit  a  fairly  well-developed  recognition  that 
their  interests  lie  along  the  road  of  Conservatism, 
Protectionism,    Imperialism   and   a   spirited   foreign 
policy,  and,  as  we  saw,  they  are  accustomed  to  bring 
organized    pressure    upon    Governments,    the    Press 
and  other  organs  of  public  opinion,  to  promote  their 
trade.     But  militarism  on  its  professional  side,   as 
personified  in  the  services,  concerns  itself  very  little 
either  with  trade  or  politics.     Though  its  officers  are 
mostly  attached  by  private  interests  and  sympathies 
to  the  centre  of  reaction,  as  members  of  a  fighting 
caste  they  have  tastes,  occupations  and  valuations 
which  preclude  them  from  any  recognition  of  the 
fact  that  they  are  instruments  either  of  statecraft 
or  of  business  policy.     As  for  the  secondary  supports 
given  to  reaction  by  education,  the  Press,  the  drink 
trade,  sport  and  the  amusements,  there  is  a  blank 
unconsciousness  of  their  larger  role.     Each  has  its 
own  clear,  direct,  strongly  specialized  interests  and 
purposes,   which  absorb  its  attention.     Drink   does 
not   need   to   analyse   its   maxim,   "  Our  trade  our 
politics/ '  in  order  to  know  who  are  its  friends  and 
who  its   enemies.     The   atmosphere   of  the   public- 
house     evinces     quite     unconscious     but     powerful 
sympathies  with  the  combative,   the  sporting,   the 
gregarious  impulses  :    it  elevates  the  emotional  and 
degrades    the   rational   elements,    it   generates    and 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    137 

radiates  the  lowest  and  worst  types  of  patriotism. 
It  does  not  require  to  realize  the  meaning  of  its 
reactionary  work  in  wasting  the  time,  the  money, 
the  brains  and  the  purpose  of  the  workers,  so  as  to 
keep  them  in  bondage  to  their  masters.  It  simply 
does  the  work  and  takes  its  pay.  The  same  is  true 
of  the  great  and  highly  elaborated  machinery  of 
sport  and  the  amusements.  It  is  organized  in  order 
to  stimulate  and  exploit  the  tastes  of  the  people,  it 
is  not  concerned  with  the  reactions  upon  the  cause  of 
democracy  produced  by  the  sedatives  and  distractions 
it  supplies.  Education  and  the  Press  are  perhaps 
slightly  more  conscious  of  the  part  they  contribute 
to  reaction.  But  even  here  it  is  a  specific  will  to 
power,  the  craving  for  exercise  of  intellectual  and 
emotional  authority,  in  order  to  get  the  satisfaction 
of  making  and  imposing  information  and  opinions, 
in  other  words,  the  satisfaction  from  the  successful 
display  of  functional  activities,  that  preponderates 
among  the  initiative  and  controlling  minds,  coupled, 
as  we  saw,  with  the  narrow  business  purpose  of  the 
intellectual  huxter. 

Nowhere  is  there  a  plain  recognition  of  a  subtle 
and  powerful  conspiracy  of  various  economic,  political, 
moral  and  intellectual  forces  to  defend  class  power 
and  to  defeat  democracy.  Since  the  conspirators 
themselves  do  not  recognize  the  part  they  play,  is  it 
likely  that  the  people  should  recognize  it  ?  Where 
there  are  glimpses  of  recognition,  they  are  usually 
attended  by  a  misrepresentation  fatal  to  the  purposes 
of  reform.  The  vulgar  imputations  of  hypocrisy 
sometimes  brought  against  the  Church,  the  univer- 
sities, the  "  capitalist  "  Press,  as  conscious  willing 


138        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

tools  of  property  and  class  rule,  play  into  the  hands 
of  reaction.  For  the  charge  of  "  hypocrisy M  is 
false,  and  the  resentment  felt  against  it  helps  to  keep 
shut  the  doors  of  that  self-criticism  by  which  keen 
minds  make  discoveries  about  the  secret  influences 
to  which  they  are  subjected  and  the  indirect  uses  they 
are  made  to  serve.  A  Tory  or  a  sham  Liberal  politician 
might  have  a  notion  that  he  was  in  politics  to  protect 
property  and  privilege  and  might  do  his  work  none 
the  worse.  But  it  is  essential  to  the  reactionary  role 
of  the  Church  that  its  clergy  should  be  blind  to  the 
play  of  the  reactionary  influences,  as  it  is  to  the 
reactionary  role  of  the  universities  that  their  teachers 
should  feel  themselves  to  be  genuine  and  single- 
minded  devotees  of  disinterested  culture.  Open- 
eyed  hypocrisy  would  spoil  them  for  the  reactionary 
service.  For  this  reason  every  accusation  of  conscious 
servitude  helps  to  disable  not  only  the  clergy  and  the 
college  don,  but  all  who  are  in  personal  touch  and 
intellectual  sympathy  with  them,  from  recognizing 
that  unconscious  servitude  which  actually  exists. 
Thus  does  ignorant  or  spiteful  calumny  recoil  on  its 
inventors.  The  chief  injury  that  is  done  does  not 
consist  in  rousing  the  objects  of  this  calumny  to 
conscious  hostility  against  their  accusers  and  the 
movements  which  they  claim  to  represent,  but  in 
closing  their  minds  to  the  processes  of  analysis  and 
self-revelation.  For  it  is  hardly  too  much  to  say  that 
the  chief  hope  of  democracy  depends  upon  the  divid- 
ing, disconcerting  and  weakening  effects  which  these 
processes  alone  can  bring  about  in  the  forces  of 
reaction.  What  democracy  most  needs  is  the  awaken- 
ing of  what  old  theology  would  call  "  the  sense  of 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    139 

sin  "  in  the  souls  of  these  enemies.  If  democracy 
itself  is  sound,  it  must  put  its  faith  in  the  truth  that 
shall  make  them  free.  If  the  vulgar  notion  that 
the  plutocracy  and  the  bourgeoisie  were  solidly 
united  in  a  clear  determination  to  keep  down  and 
exploit  the  proletariat  were  correct,  the  case  for 
democracy  would  indeed  be  hopeless.  For  history 
makes  it  clear  that  mere  numbers,  mere  quantity  of 
physical  force  or  even  of  electoral  power,  cannot 
prevail  against  superior  knowledge,  organization, 
habit  of  command  and  the  possession  of  all  the 
dominating  positions  in  the  political  and  economic 
system.  It  is  necessary  to  sap  the  intellectual  and 
moral  defences  of  the  enemy.  This  can  only  be  done 
by  assuming  that  they  are  for  the  most  part  honest  and 
well-meaning  men,  genuinely  deceived  as  to  the  inner 
meaning  and  effects  of  the  services  they  render  to 
reaction,  and  by  getting  them  to  see  the  truths  which 
have  been  hidden  from  them  in  the  complicated  folds 
of  modern  social  structures.  Moral  and  humanitarian 
appeals,  important  as  they  are,  have  proved  capable 
of  evasion  ;  they  easily  run  off  into  philanthropy  or 
other  worthless  individualistic  channels.  A  whole 
"  philosophy  of  Charity  Organization "  has  been 
invented  to  contain  them.  It  is  a  better  psychology 
that  is  needed,  and  along  with  it  a  better  interpretation 
of  the  social  environment,  especially  in  terms  of 
economics  and  of  politics.  All  the  larger  presenta- 
tions of  the  democratic  movement,  Socialism  in  parti- 
cular, have  suffered  from  these  intellectual  defects, 
a  too  simple  and  superficial  psychology  and  a  too  rigid 
and  intransigeant  presentation  of  the  world  of  affairs. 
Largely  on  this  account  Socialists  and  other  Radicals 


140         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

have  not  succeeded  in  getting  their  swords  of  criticism 
into  the  joints  of  the  armour  of  their  enemies.  Their 
surveys  of  the  enemy  positions  have  been  vague, 
and  they  have  sought  to  cover  up  the  vagueness  by 
imperfect  formulas  or  impassioned  rhetoric.  What 
is  wanted  is  a  close  aircraft  reconnaissance,  better 
map-making  and  exacter  calculations.  But  I  must 
not  carry  the  military  metaphor  too  far.  For  my 
real  point  is  not  so  much  to  get  democrats  to  recognize 
more  clearly  the  nature  and  the  strength  of  the 
reactionary  positions  they  are  attacking  as  to  sow 
the  dissension  among  the  enemy  which  self-knowledge 
would  bring.  It  is  true  that  the  growth  of  the  moral 
sciences  under  the  secret  pressures  which  we  have 
described  has  not  contributed  much  towards  the  self- 
knowledge  that  is  desired.  For  these  sciences  have 
been  distorted  to  the  service  of  Conservatism.  But 
truth  will  out ;  intellectualism  is  not  knowingly 
mercenary,  and  the  discovery  of  its  secret  biases  is 
already  beginning  to  make  havoc  with  the  conserva- 
tive defences.  Modern  revelations  of  the  business 
world  and  of  the  conditions  of  the  people  have  exploded 
the  easy  optimism  of  the  classical  economy,  and  its 
hastily  improvised  substitutes  do  not  wield  the 
intellectual  authority  of  their  predecessors.  Equally 
uncompromising  revelations  of  "  real  politics  "  have 
gone  far  towards  opening  the  eyes  of  all  intelligent 
people  to  the  folly  of  supposing  that  a  genuine  demo- 
cracy was  coming  to  pass  by  some  formal  enlargement 
of  the  franchise  and  other  modes  for  realizing  the  will 
of  the  people,  with  no  provisions  for  bringing  into 
being  that  effective  will.  Now  that  the  underworkings 
of  the  human  mind,  individual  and  collective,  in  the 


SPIRITUAL  AND  SOCIAL  REACTIONISTS    141 

formation  and  the  operation  of  all  social  institutions, 
language,  art,  religion,  as  well  as  government  and 
industry,  are  being  explored  anew,  the  barren  naivete 
of  the  earlier  mapping  of  the  mind  will  be  relegated 
to  the  limbo  of  a  pre-scientific  age,  ranking  with 
the  Copernican  system  and  the  trajectories  of 
Mercator. 

I  do  not  mean  that  this  new  Appeal  to  Reason 
among  the  allies  and  auxiliaries  of  reaction  can  at 
all  dispense  with  the  organization  of  democratic 
forces  among  the  subject  classes,  or  even  with  the 
necessity  of  a  bitter  struggle  which  ma}'  take  the  form 
and  the  substance  of  a  class  war.  But  success  in 
that  struggle  will  depend  not  more  upon  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  forces  of  democracy  than  upon  the  dis- 
organization of  the  forces  of  reaction.  And  this 
latter  achievement  depends  upon  the  strength  and 
skill  of  the  Appeal  to  Reason.  This  is  the  special 
service  which  the  scattering  of  intellectuals,  deserters 
from  the  upper  class  and  bourgeois  creeds,  is  best 
capable  of  rendering  to  the  cause  of  democracy.  For 
they  have  liberated  themselves  and  can  therefore 
help  to  liberate  others  from  that  fear  of  thought,  that 
self-imposed  inner  servitude,  which  is  the  greatest 
enemy  of  human  progress. 

Men  fear  thought  as  they  fear  nothing  else  on  earth — 
more  than  ruin,  more  even  than  death.  Thought  is 
subversive  and  revolutionary  ;  thought  is  merciless  to 
privilege,  established  institutions  and  comfortable  habits  ; 
thought  is  anarchic  and  lawless,  indifferent  to  authority, 
careless  of  the  well-tried  wisdom  of  the  ages.  Thought 
looks  into  the  pit  of  hell  and  is  not  afraid.     It  sees  man, 


142        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

a  feeble  speck,  surrounded  by  unfathomable  depths  of 
silence,  yet  it  bears  itself  proudly,  as  unmoved  as  if  it 
were  lord  of  the  universe.  Thought  is  great  and  swift 
and  free,  the  light  of  the  world,  and  the  chief  glory 
of  man.1 

1  Bertrand   Russell,  "Principles  of    Social    Reconstruction," 
p.  166  (Allen  &  Unwin  Ltd.). 


PART   II 
THE   DEFENCE   OP  DEMOCRACY 


CHAPTER   I 
HOW  TO  BREAK  THE    VICIOUS   CIRCLE 

In  face  of  this  array  of  reactionary  forces,  what 
tactics  are  the  defenders  of  liberty,  democracy  and 
social  progress  to  pursue  ?  So  formidable  is  the 
enemy,  so  strong  his  hold  upon  the  instruments  of 
power,  as  to  render  it  unthinkable  that  he  will  yield 
to  any  merely  instinctive  revolt  against  the  new 
shackles  imposed  upon  our  liberties,  or  to  any  blind 
movement  of  economic  discontent.  There  must  be 
a  considered  policy  of  attack.  In  that  consideration 
the  first  need  is  to  understand  the  nature  of  the  bond 
of  alliance  between  the  reactionary  forces.  Nor  is 
it  enough  to  realize,  as  we  have  done,  the  general 
character  of  the  interests  and  secret  sympathies 
which  has  drawn  them  together.  We  must  under- 
stand that  we  are  dealing  with  a  vicious  circle.  This 
term  is  commonly  applied  in  logic  to  a  bad  process  of 
reasoning,  the  badness  of  which  consists  in  arguing 
that  A  leads  to  B  and  B  to  C,  the  accepted  conclusion 
— without  perceiving  that  it  may  with  equal  reason 
be  held  that  C  leads  to  A.  In  discussions  upon  the 
principles  of  social  reform  the  common  illustration 
is  found  in  the  contention  between  the  individualist 
and  the  socialist  as  to  the  validity  of  proposed  reforms. 
The  individualist  contends  that  poverty  is  mainly 

10  I45 


146        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

due  to  defects  of  personal  character,  and  argues  that 
reforms  in  social  environment  are  unattainable 
without  preceding  improvements  in  personal  intelli- 
gence and  morale,  and  that  even  were  reforms  imposed 
from  outside  they  would  be  inefficacious.  To  this 
the  socialist  replies  by  pointing  out  that  personal 
intelligence  and  morale  cannot  be  improved  while 
the  environment  remains  what  it  is.  "  You  must 
first,"  he  urges,  "  improve  the  environment,  then  you 
will  get  your  improvement  in  character,"  while  the 
individualist  once  more  retorts  that  the  very  desire 
and  so  the  power  to  effect  improvements  of  environ- 
ment imply  a  prior  improvement  of  character.  So 
the  argument  goes  waltzing  round. 

The  circle  of  reaction  which  confronts  democracy 
will  be  quite  as  vicious  and  more  complex  in  its 
arrangement.  The  point  at  which  we  enter  it  is  the 
militarist  bureaucracy  that  will  be  in  control  of  affairs 
when  the  war  is  brought  to  an  end,  with  conscription 
in  being  and  great  emergency  powers  exercised  by 
the  Government  over  industry  and  the  civil  life  of 
the  people.  How  are  the  people  to  get  back  the  civil 
liberties  they  have  lost  and  to  restore  and  strengthen 
their  powers  of  self-government  ?  The  retention  of 
conscription  and  of  exceptional  legislative  and  execu- 
tive powers  in  the  hands  of  a  self-appointed  oligarchy 
will  be  defended  on  the  ground  that  peace  is  precarious 
and  the  international  situation  so  grave  that  an 
immediate  return  to  free  institutions  and  constitu- 
tional forms  of  government  is  dangerous  to  national 
defence.  If  the  reactionists  have  their  way,  peace 
will  have  been  made  precarious  and  the  international 
situation    kept    grave    by    a    settlement    based    on 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    147 

military,  naval  and  economic  force  and  containing 
elements  of  insecurity.  The  dangers  of  industrial 
and  civil  disorder,  arising  from  the  economic  processes 
of  resettlement,  and  graver  on  account  of  the  pre- 
carious international  situation,  will  be  adduced  as 
a  second  reason  for  the  retention  of  emergency  powers 
for  the  Government. 

If  this  menace  is  to  be  averted,  the  peoples  must 
be  able  to  insist  upon  an  international  settlement 
not  containing  the  seeds  of  future  wars,  and  a  League 
of  Nations,  operated  not  on  lines  of  class  diplomacy, 
but  in  accordance  with  the  mutual  interests  of  the 
constituent  peoples.  So,  likewise,  in  dealing  with 
the  difficulties  of  economic  reconstruction,  a  genuinely 
representative  policy  must  displace  the  action  of  a 
definitely  capitalist  State  operated  by  official  dictators 
and  a  few  captured  and  servile  "  labour  leaders/' 
In  other  words,  political  and  economic  democracy 
must  be  able  to  assert  itself  with  vigour  and  success. 
But  how  can  it  be  possible  that,  amid  the  confusion 
of  returning  peace,  the  political  and  economic  organi- 
zations of  the  people,  impaired  or  lapsed  for  the  dura- 
tion of  the  war,  can  become  so  much  more  powerful 
as  to  insist  not  merely  on  the  resumption  of  all  pre-war 
liberties,  but  on  the  displacement  of  class  supremacy 
in  foreign  policy  by  the  principles  and  personnel  of 
popular  government  ?  For  nothing  less  than  this 
democratic  control  of  foreign  policy  will  suffice. 
Leave  this  single  sphere  of  oligarchy,  and  it  is  now 
made  manifest  that  all  other  forms  of  popular  self- 
government  are  almost  worthless.  For  the  class  that 
controls  foreign  policy  controls  the  supreme  issue  of 
peace  or  war,  and  through  that  controls  expenditure 


148         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

on  armaments,  issues  of  conscription  and  the  direction 
given  to  industrial  and  commercial  development, 
education  and  the  intellectual,  moral  and  recreational 
life  of  the  people.  If,  therefore,  democracy  is  to  be 
anything  more  than  an  idle  name,  given  to  a  finally 
impotent  vote  cast  once  in  each  five  years,  the  test 
struggle  will  be  fought  around  the  fortress  of  foreign 
policy.  For,  retaining  that  fortress,  the  capitalist 
oligarchy  will  always  be  able  to  win  back  any  losses 
it  may  have  sustained  in  the  control  of  domestic 
politics  during  peace-time,  by  rousing  the  fear,  or, 
in  the  last  resort,  the  actual  peril  of  another  war. 

But  how  can  the  people  in  this  or  other  capitalist 
countries  make  themselves  strong  enough  to  win  the 
real  control  of  their  external  and  internal  policy  ? 
We  say  that  if  they  could  be  brought  to  a  realizing 
sense  of  the  danger  of  their  situation,  and  the  urgent 
necessity  of  organizing  so  effectively  as  to  give  real 
meaning  to  the  formal  power  which  numbers  possess, 
success  would  be  theirs.  But  here  we  collide  against 
another  power  of  the  reaction.  The  people,  as  a 
whole,  have  not  the  intelligence,  the  knowledge  and 
the  persistent  will  needed  to  make  democracy  effective 
for  this  great  task.  Why  not  ?  Not  because  of  any 
congenital  incapacity  to  think,  to  learn,  and  to  exert 
will-power  in  seeking  their  ends,  but  because  the 
circumstances  under  which  they  live  and  work  and 
the  arts  of  management  of  public  opinion  by  the 
ruling  and  possessing  classes  preclude  them  from 
acquiring  and  exercising  the  intellectual  and  moral 
powers  which  are  needed.  The  poverty  of  the  poor 
and  the  wealth  of  the  rich  conspire  to  make  democracy 
impossible.     Disabled  by  a  life  of  toil  amid  depressing 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    149 

surroundings  for  the  effort  of  clear  thought  and 
effective  co-operation  for  large,  complex,  and  distant 
action,  the  mass  of  workers  are  distracted  and  beguiled 
by  the  "  organs  of  public  opinion/ '  which  play  upon 
their  credulity  and  their  lighter  tastes  and  interests 
so  as  to  keep  them  from  any  form  of  organization 
that  is  really  dangerous  to  the  powers  above.  In 
other  words,  the  operation  of  economic  forces  under 
capitalism  prevents  the  public  from  realizing 
adequately  the  dangers  and  injustices  from  which 
they  suffer,  and  from  exerting  the  will-power  requisite 
for  organizing  so  as  to  apply  effective  remedies.  So 
we  are  brought  to  the  orthodox  Socialist  position. 
Capitalism  is  the  enemy — capitalism,  with  its  mono- 
poly of  wealth,  leisure  and  intelligence,  and  its 
power  to  use  these  privileges  not  only  to  rob  the 
labourer  of  a  large  portion  of  the  product  of  his 
labour,  but  so  to  enfeeble  and  enslave  his  mind  as  to 
prevent  him  from  organizing  any  effective  rebellion. 
But  how  can  these  powers  of  capitalism  be  broken, 
except  by  means  of  that  very  organization  of 
political  and  economic  democracy  which  they  are 
employed  to  crush  ?  So  the  vicious  circle  is  once 
more  closed.  Military  oligarchy  is  linked  to  secret 
class  diplomacy;  the  fruits  of  this  foreign  policy 
involve  conscription  and  vast  expenditure  on 
armaments,  thus  precluding  effective  advances  in 
those  services  of  educational  and  social  reform 
which  would  render  possible  a  democratic  organi- 
zation competent  to  overthrow  the  forces  of 
capitalism  which  sustain,  direct  and  feed  upon 
the  strong  military  State.  The  mechanical  analogy 
of     an    endless     chain   is   not    adequate.     For   the 


150        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

vicious  circle  is  organic  and  alive.  It  is  a  poisonous 
co-operative  interplay  of  parasitic  organisms,  feeding 
on  the  life  of  the  peoples  by  mastering  and  perverting 
to  their  own  base  purposes  the  political,  economic 
and  moral  activities  of  humanity.  Political  oligarchy, 
industrial  and  financial  capitalism,  militarism,  intel- 
lectual and  spiritual  authoritarianism,  find  natural 
allies  in  the  servile  Press,  the  servile  school,  the  ser- 
vile Church,  which  they  utilize  to  drape  their  selfish 
dominion  with  the  gallant  devices  of  national  service, 
Imperialism,  "  scientific  management "  and  other 
cloaks  for  class-mastery. 

The  diagram  opposite  will  roughly  serve  to  illus- 
trate the  nature  of  the  circle  of  reaction,  though  it 
goes  a  very  little  way  towards  representing  the 
intricacy  of  the  mutual  interplay  of  material  and 
spiritual  interests  by  which  the  reactionary  factors 
are  related  to  one  another. 

It  is,  however,  so  important  to  realize  the  nature 
of  the  bonds  of  sympathy  and  mutual  support  among 
members  of  the  circle,  that  we  may  profitably  recite 
the  part  played  by  such  a  typical  force  of  reaction 
as  Protectionism. 

By  Protectionism  is  meant  the  utilization  of 
politics  by  trades  for  special  economic  gain  through 
restriction  of  free  markets.  Of  Protectionism  the 
tariff  is  the  leading  instrument.  Now,  Protectionism 
enjoys  a  direct  community  of  interest  or  sympathy 
with  almost  every  other  member  of  the  circle,  even 
those  which  seem  at  first  sight  most  remote  from  its 
commercial  aims.  Its  connection  with  the  economic 
taproot,  improperty  or  capitalism,  is  of  course  the 
closest :    for  its  essential  activity  consists  in  looting 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    151 

the  unprotected  consumer  and  the  weaker  trades  for 
the  benefit  of  the  strongly  organized  capitalist  trades. 
It  connects  with  Imperialism,  partly  by  retaining 
and   incorporating   remnants   of   the   old   policy   of 


\V* 


BUREAUCRACY 


&»** 


p«orffr. 


/% 


*f, 


MILITARISM 


AUTHORITARIANISMl 
KCHURCH.SCHOOL^ 
PRESS  ACJ- 

STATE 
ABSOLUTISM 


47/ 


1MPR0PERTY 
'(LANDLORDISM 
CAPITALISM 
ARMAMENTS) 


LEGALISM 


*fe 


*Atm 


DISTRACTION? 
EMOLLIENTS 
(CHARITY. 
V SPORT. 

•ss^ R,NK 


mercantilism,  partly  by  attaching  itself,  by  special 
modification  of  structure,  to  the  sentimental  and 
political  design  of  a  united  self-sufficing  Empire.  It 
appeals  to  bureaucracy,  State  absolutism  and  the 
wider    spirit   of  authoritarianism  in   various   ways. 


152        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

Bureaucracy  it  conciliates  by  offering  a  large  province 
for  the  control  of  expert  officialism,  the  formation 
and  administration  of  a  "  scientific  tariff,"  power, 
and  lucrative  appointments.  State  absolutism 
(Prussianism)  it  nourishes  and  conciliates  by  foster- 
ing a  distinctively  national  economy  and  by  its. 
hostility  to  economic  and  political  internationalism. 
It  connects  with  militarism,  partly  by  the  special 
requirements  of  the  armament  and  related  trades  in 
their  capacity  of  key-industries  needing  protection 
and  other  State  aids  as  instruments  of  national 
defence,  partly  by  the  emotional  sympathy  obtained 
through  representing  trade  in  terms  of  economic  war. 
Trade,  falsely  imagined  as  a  struggle  between  rival 
States,  serves  to  feed  and  inflame  international 
animosities  and  to  sow  the  seeds  of  militarism  and 
war.  With  the  State  policy,  here  designated  "  regu- 
lative Socialism/'  Protectionism  has  a  close  affinity. 
In  modern  Protectionist  countries  protection  is 
sought,  not  only  through  tariffs,  but  in  various  forms 
of  subsidy  and  other  legal  or  administrative  aids  given 
to  home  or  export  trade  in  railroad  and  shipping 
facilities,  etc.  A  still  closer  attachment  has  been 
formed  in  Australia  by  fastening  tariff  regulations 
to  a  labour  policy  of  guaranteed  wages  and  pensions, 
an  experiment  very  likely  to  be  proposed  in  this 
country  as  a  means  of  buying  the  support  of  labour 
for  the  new  Protectionist  designs  of  capitalism.  The 
bonds  which  attach  Protection  to  Conservatism  are 
so  strong,  so  numerous  and  so  evident,  as  to  require 
no  close  analysis.  It  may  here  suffice  to  say  that 
Protectionism,  as  a  form  of  capitalistic  exploitation, 
requires  Conservatism  as  the  natural  defender  of  the 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    153 

vested  interests  it  creates.  Finally,  Protectionism 
makes  an  easy  appeal  to  every  other  obscurantist, 
bellicose  and  reactionary  element.  The  spirit  of  the 
public-house,  the  race-course,  the  music-hall  and  the 
"  yellow  "  Press,  so  easily  accords  with  the  presenta- 
tion of  trade  as  a  competitive  struggle  between  nations 
as  to  close  the  door  to  any  recognition  of  its  true 
co-operative  character. 

In  similar  fashion  we  could  trace  the  network  of 
common  interests  and  sympathies  which  connect 
any  other  member  of  the  circle,  such  as  Imperial- 
ism, bureaucracy,  academic  education,  landlordism, 
legalism,  with  all  the  other  members,  thus  weaving 
the  whole  number  into  one  effective  organic  confedera- 
tion of  reactionary  powers,  each  rallying  to  the  support 
of  any  other  that  is  attacked,  each  continually  engaged 
in  adding  material  strength  and  moral  prestige  to 
the  others. 

I  have  laboured  at  some  length  the  analysis  of 
this  unholy  alliance  in  order  that  defenders  of  demo- 
cracy may  realize  the  number  and  the  resources  of 
their  enemy.  For,  until  these  are  realized,  democracy 
can  evolve  no  tactics  adequate  to  safeguard  any  of 
the  liberties  it  still  retains,  much  less  to  make  new 
advances  in  the  establishment  of  the  power  of  the 
peoples.  For  if  my  analysis  is  correct,  none  of  the 
single  and  simple  remedies  devised  by  political  or 
economic  reformers  will  meet  the  needs  of  the  case. 
Attack  the  fortress  of  secret  diplomacy,  say  some. 
The  democratic  control  of  foreign  policy  is  the  key 
to  salvation.  But  how  can  this  be  done  when  the 
vicious  foreign  policy  is  sustained  by  social  and 
political  forces  rooted  in  capitalism  ?     Well,  says  the 


154         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

socialist,  you  must  first  attack  and  overthrow  capita- 
lism. Capitalism  is  the  taproot  from  which  all  the 
other  branches  of  reaction  derive  their  nutriment. 
Protectionism  and  Imperialism  are  special  modes 
of  profiteering  in  which  the  powers  of  the  State 
are  handled  by  business  interests  for  business  ends. 
The  secret  processes  of  foreign  policy  are  mainly 
engaged  in  promoting  commercial  and  financial 
objects  and  militarism  and  navalism  are  instruments 
in  their  pushful  profiteering.  Moreover,  militarism 
and  navalism  are  themselves  great  and  increasingly 
profitable  branches  of  capitalism.  Regulative  and 
concessive  Socialism  is  oil  to  lubricate  the  wheels  of 
capitalism.  The  Law,  the  Church,  the  Press,  the 
universities,  the  bureaucratic  State  itself,  are  in  the 
last  resort  the  mercenary  defenders  of  the  capitalist 
system.  Even  emollients  and  distractions,  such  as 
drink  and  the  amusement  trades,  are  great  capitalistic 
enterprises  out  for  monopoly  gains.  Therefore  cut 
out  from  business  the  profiteering  motive  and  the 
forms  of  improperty  which  accrue,  and  all  the  other 
organs  of  reaction  would  wither  and  collapse. 

It  is  a  specious  proposal,  that  of  a  single  concen- 
trated attack  on  capitalism  as  a  profiteering  system. 
But  it  is  not  practicable.  For  it  ignores  two  factors 
in  the  situation.  The  first  is  that  many  of  the  forces 
of  reaction  have  strong  supports  in  personal  and 
social  motives  of  interest,  power  and  prestige,  inde- 
pendent of  their  alliance  with  capitalism.  The 
second  is  that  Socialism,  national  or  international,  is 
not  really  able  to  approach,  much  less  to  overthrow, 
capitalism,  because  of  the  powerful  defences,  political, 
moral  and  intellectual,  by  which  it  is  encompassed. 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    155 

Socialism  has  neither  a  concerted  feasible  tactic,  nor 
a  sufficient  number  of  able  trusted  leaders  in  close 
intellectual  and  political  agreement,  nor  a  large  enough 
body  of  enthusiastic,  convinced  and  indivisible 
followers.  The  patriotic  stampede  of  Socialism  in 
every  country  in  the  summer  of  1914  is  as  convincing 
a  testimony  to  its  inadequacy  to  the  task  of  over- 
throwing capitalism  as  could  possibly  be  given. 
This  inadequacy  will  not  disappear  until  Socialism 
ceases  to  isolate  and  overstress  the  economic  class 
war.  I  do  not  depreciate  the  importance  of  this 
aspect  of  the  great  democratic  struggle.  But  if 
social  democracy  is  to  deserve  its  title  and  to  realize 
its  meaning,  it  must  broaden  its  outlook  and  its  policy. 
If  capitalism  were  a  really  separable  phenomenon  in 
the  analysis  of  reactionary  power,  then  Socialism 
might  sustain  its  limited  role  of  concentrating  all 
its  efforts,  economic  and  political,  upon  its  destruction. 
But  when  capitalism  is  understood  as  only  one, 
albeit  the  most  important,  member  of  a  confederacy 
of  reactionary  forces,  each  with  other  evil  sources  of 
power  besides  the  nourishment  it  gets  from  capitalism, 
the  task  of  overthrowing  it  must  be  expanded  into 
the  broader  task  of  establishing  democracy.  The 
people  cannot  successfully  attack  any  stronghold  of 
capitalism  unless  they  control  their  State,  both  its 
legislative  and  administrative  services,  for  otherwise 
the  assailed  interests  will  use  the  weapons  of  the 
State  to  ward  off  their  attack.  The  people  cannot 
even  plan  an  effective  attack  on  capitalism  until 
they  have  the  education  and  the  understanding  to 
direct  their  attack,  not  at  some  obvious  and  super- 
ficial abuse  of  employers'  powers,  but  at  the  vitals 


156        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

of  their  enemy.  How  long  a  time,  for  example,  it 
takes  for  a  working-class  socialist  movement  to 
realize  that  the  heart  of  modern  capitalism  is  the 
credit  system  and  that  the  socialization  of  credit  is 
the  most  important  means  of  undermining  capitalism  ! 
If,  therefore,  the  people  is  to  deal  effectively  with 
the  circle  of  reaction,  it  must  strike  simultaneously  not 
at  one  but  at  many  points.  It  cannot  say,  Capital- 
ism is  the  most  formidable  enemy,  therefore  we  will 
dispose  of  that  first  and  then  we  will  take  possession 
of  the  State  and  conquer,  one  by  one,  the  means  of 
education,  the  Press  and  the  other  members  of  the 
circle.  A  vicious  circle  cannot  be  broken  in  this  way. 
The  full  spirit  of  democracy  must  be  roused,  organized 
and  directed  to  a  general  attack.  After  this  war 
every  cause  of  popular  progress  will  be  endangered, 
every  liberty  menaced.  Hitherto  the  reforming 
spirit  and  the  progressive  movement  in  society  have 
drifted  into  barren  specialism.  This  has  been  the 
temptation  of  the  "  practical  "  reformer,  the  desire 
to  achieve  some  single,  definite,  early  result  by  confin- 
ing his  reforming  energy  to  some  narrow  manageable 
line  of  activity.  The  interrelation  between  all  reforms 
has  even  helped  to  bring  about  this  wasteful  economy. 
For  it  has  enabled  the  specialist  to  represent  his 
speciality  as  the  source  or  the  essential  condition  of 
every  other  reform.  The  single-taxer,  for  example, 
has  been  able  to  find  in  his  specific  a  full  social  gospel, 
economic,  political  and  moral,  the  sufficient  basis  of 
a  new  ideal  human  order.  The  Free-trader,  even 
now,  often  exhibits  his  principle  and  policy  as  a 
panacea  for  all  national  and  international  troubles, 
and  as  an  adequate  security  for  liberty  and  justice. 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    157 

The  educational  enthusiast  is  easily  persuaded  that 
trained  individual  character  and  intelligence  are  the 
only  or  prior  conditions  of  every  genuine  reform,  and 
that  social  salvation  can  come  about  in  no  other  way. 
But  even  he  is  undercut  by  the  temperance  or  the 
housing  specialist,  who  believes  that  the  destruction 
of  the  drink  habit  or  the  better  hygiene  of  the  home 
is  necessary  to  give  education  or  any  other  higher 
desire  or  activity  an  opportunity  of  growth.  Within 
the  last  two  generations  there  has  been  a  great  uprising 
of  reform  energy  in  the  Churches,  the  political  parties, 
the  labour  movement,  in  organized  science  and 
philanthropy.  But  it  has  been  for  the  most  part 
sterilized  by  the  same  practical  fallacy,  i.e.  the  belief 
that  early  tangible  results  could  best  be  got  by  separa- 
tist action,  by  each  group  "  doing  its  bit  "  in  the  work 
of  social  reform.  Every  one  of  these  reforms  is 
necessary.  But  every  one  of  them  is  inimical  to 
some  one  or  more  powerful  vested  interest,  material 
or  moral,  and  is  suspected  by  the  general  body  of 
conservatism  and  reaction.  Thus  its  separate 
endeavour  to  redress  a  particular  grievance  or  to 
promote  a  particular  advance  has  been  crushed,  or 
made  innocuous  by  some  trifling  policy  of  concessions. 
Reaction,  motived  by  some  inner  impulse  of  co- 
operation, presents  a  solid  front  against  such  particu- 
larist  attacks.  Finding  its  enemy  divided,  it  triumphs. 
If  democracy  is  to  have  a  chance  of  winning,  it  can 
only  be  by  the  union  of  all  those  genuinely  progressive 
forces  which  have  hitherto  acted  apart.  But  here 
comes  the  difficulty.  They  must  perceive  the  neces- 
sity of  common  action.  This  means  a  widening  of 
intellectual  outlook  and  of  sympathy.     The  single- 


158        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

taxer,  the  temperance  reformer,  the  educationalist 
the  Free-trader,  the  trade-unionist,  the  socialist  must 
become  in  fact  and  in  feeling  before  all  else  a  democrat. 
He  must  have  a  vision  of  the  whole  scope  of  what  is 
involved  in  democracy,  and  the  struggle  to  achieve 
it,  and  be  willing  to  put  his  specialism  into  the  common 
movement.  Possibly  the  term  and  concept  "  demo- 
cracy "  by  common  usage  give  an  undue  prominence 
to  the  distinctively  political  aspect  of  the  movement, 
just  as  Socialism  is  apt  to  do  to  the  economic  aspect. 
But  I  choose  democracy  as  the  expression  of  the  wider 
aims,  because  it  makes  the  appeal  to  the  power  of  a 
self-directing  people,  operative  in  industry,  in  govern- 
ment, and  in  all  the  institutions  and  activities  of 
social  life,  as  the  goal  of  co-operative  endeavour  and 
the  instrument  for  the  attainment  or  support  of  all 
the  special  forms  through  which  the  common  life 
finds  expression. 

The  whole  object  of  this  somewhat  laborious 
analysis  of  reactionism  has  been  to  show  the  unity  of 
the  apparently  unrelated  reactionary  forces,  and 
thereby  to  reveal  the  necessity  of  co-ordination  among 
the  forces  of  democracy.  If  we  can  show  the  keen 
land  reformer  that  he  cannot  in  fact  gain  his  object 
except  by  throwing  his  energies  into  the  broad  move- 
ment to  recover  and  enlarge  the  liberties  of  the 
people ;  if  we  can  make  the  educationalist,  the 
temperance  man,  the  "  social  purist,"  the  hygienist, 
the  franchise  leaguer  and  the  other  specialists  recog- 
nize that  they  also  can  only  make  progress  to  their 
desired  goal  by  perceiving  and  feeling  its  organic 
unity  with  the  general  cause  of  democracy,  we  shall 
for  the  first  time  begin  to  realize  that  hitherto  baffling 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    159 

hope  which  has  deluded  several  generations  of  demo- 
crats, the  power  of  numbers.  Democracy  has  never 
yet  had  this  power ;  its  friends  as  well  as  its  enemies 
have  always  succeeded  in  dividing  the  mass  mind 
and  the  mass  energy,  by  canalizing  it  into  innumerable 
feeble,  isolated  or  conflicting  channels. 

If  the  experiences  of  this  war  have  not  revealed 
this  fatal  error  and  the  necessity  of  expelling  from  all 
specialist  progressive  movements  those  elements  which 
are  unable  to  take  the  wider  outlook  and  to  respond 
to  the  larger  intellectual  appeal,  we  can  only  conclude 
that  our  people  is  incapable  and  therefore  unworthy 
of  democracy.  If  they  can  still  submit  to  be  hood- 
winked and  bamboozled  by  sham  forms  of  political 
representation,  by  industrial  controls  which  leave 
them  no  determinant  voice  in  the  most  vital  issues 
of  work  and  livelihood,  by  organs  of  "  public  opinion  n 
in  which  the  public  has  no  initiative,  by  social 
sedatives  and  distractions  designed  to  keep  them 
quiet  and  innocuous,  there  is  nothing  to  be  done 
except  to  dismiss  from  our  minds  the  vision  of  demo- 
cracy as  an  idle  phantasm  of  a  disordered  imagina- 
tion. But,  before  submitting  to  this  dismal  judgment, 
those  who  entertain  the  larger  vision  must  at  least 
make  their  appeal  to  the  leaders  of  the  specialist 
reforms.  I  do  not  despair  of  this  appeal.  Many  of 
the  active  spirits  in  the  movements  of  peace,  temper- 
ance, housing,  land,  franchise  and  other  specialisms 
are  attached  to  more  than  one  reform  and  have  been 
feeling  their  way  to  co-operation  with  kindred  bodies. 
Inside  many  of  the  Churches  the  catholic  spirit  has 
been  gaining  on  the  particularist  in  the  movement 
towards  a  more  liberal  theology,  a  closer  spiritual 


160        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

communion,  and  a  common  social  ethic.  Even  in 
the  older  political  parties  in  this  and  other  countries, 
modern  thought  has  been  operating  as  a  dissolvent 
of  the  accepted  class-creeds  and  barriers.  Active- 
minded  men  and  women  have  been  sitting  more 
loosely  by  their  institutions  and  attachments.  The 
critical  spirit  has  been  abroad.  The  rapid  ferment 
of  thought  and  feeling  on  the  status  of  woman  and 
sex  problems  during  recent  years  has  been  at  once  an 
index  and  a  source  of  revolutionary  energy  directed 
to  the  very  foundations  of  society.  Coincident  with 
the  new  and  startling  ebullitions  of  revolt  in  the  world 
of  labour,  this  new  sex  consciousness  has  transformed 
the  whole  nature  of  social  discontent,  and  helped  to 
turn  it  into  broader  channels.  The  shattering  experi- 
ences of  war  will  have  broken  the  taboos  and  sanctities 
which  warded  off  close  scrutiny  into  the  basic  institu- 
tions of  State,  Property  and  Industry,  the  Family, 
Religion  and  Morals.  A  new  tide  of  scepticism  and 
audacious  experiment  will  surge  against  all  the  pillars 
of  the  accepted  social  order,  meeting  in  turbulent 
opposition  the  drift  of  war-weary  and  conservative 
forces  towards  the  shelter  of  the  old  grooves.  Millions 
of  minds  to  which  these  basic  institutions  were  unreal 
abstractions,  with  no  actual  bearing  for  good  or  evil 
on  their  lives,  will  have  learnt  differently.  Hard 
personal  experience  will  have  taught  them  what  an 
instrument  of  destruction  and  oppression  a  State  may 
be.  The  sanctity  of  property,  industrial  liberty, 
family  life,  standards  of  consumption,  will  have  been 
subjected  to  violent  and  even  paralysing  shocks. 
That  an  act  of  politics  can  bring  death  and  desolation 
into  a  million  homes,  that  all  the  common  habits 


HOW  TO  BREAK  THE  VICIOUS  CIRCLE    161 

and  liberties  of  men  and  women  can  suddenly  be 
cancelled  by  official  orders,  that  all  the  natural  and 
accepted  precepts  of  religion  and  morality  can  be 
violated  or  reversed  at  the  call  of  national  emergency, 
will  have  been  a  revelation  of  huge,  unsuspected 
perils  in  the  midst  of  which  the  peoples  have  been 
slumbering.  All  live-minded  men  and  women  must 
perceive  how  foolish  and  futile  are  the  little  political, 
social,  religious  or  philanthropic  u  causes "  into 
which  they  have  put  their  zeal,  so  long  as  these  con- 
trolling institutions  of  society  remain  so  radically 
defective  in  structure  and  control.  Our  hope  lies 
in  the  conviction  that  the  fierce  light  of  war  and  its 
glowing  aftermath  will  show  men  that,  unless  an 
ordered  popular  will  can  flood  all  the  main  channels 
of  national  life,  intelligently  controlling  all  the  major 
organs  of  government  and  influence,  State,  economic 
system,  Church,  Press,  schools  and  universities,  and_ 


the  recreative  and  relief  adjuncts,  there  is  and  can  be 


no  security  for  anything  that  ordinary  men  and  women 
value  in  |ife.  The  exposure  of  sham  democracy  in 
the  "  liberal  nations  "  will  have  been  complete.  If 
the  lesson  is  not  learned,  it  will  be  because  the  ignor- 
ance or  stupidity  of  the  peoples  is  invincible.  To 
divide  and  to  distract  have  been  the  methods  by 
which  the  forces  of  reaction  have  made  democracy  a 
sham.      Unity  and  continuity  of   effort  alone  can    y 

make   riernnrrary   a    rffflflty, 


II 


CHAPTER   II 

THE  NEW  ECONOMIC  SITUATION 

One  of  the  most  subtle  defences  of  Conservatism  has 
been  the  modern  notion,  sedulously  sown,  \that 
\|emocracy  was  a  process  so  inevitable  and  predestineoj 
in  the  evolution,  of  society  that  no  clearly  conscious 
and  purposive  direction  was  required.  Marxism 
embodied  this  false  belief  in  its  "  scientific  "  view  of 
the  evolution  of  industry,  and  its  political  counterpart 
has  flourished  most  vigorously  in  the  optimism  of 
the  ordinary  "  good "  American,  The  dissipation 
of  this  delusion  should  be  one  of  the  chief  services  of 
this  war.  Democracy  cannot  be  brought  about  by  a 
drift  or  tendency  of  unconscious  purpose ;  it  needs 
conscious  organization  and  direction  by  the  co- 
operative will  of  individuals  and  nations.  Until 
this  co-operative  will  has  been  created  and  made 
effective,  it  must  continue  to  remain  an  open  question 
whether  democracy  is  possible.  The  method  of  this 
conscious  operation  of  the  human  will  is  therefore 
the  issue  of  first  practical  importance.  Now,  though 
I  have  striven  to  point  out  the  necessity  of  organizing 
the  democratic  will  so  as  to  attack  not  one  or  two  but 
many  points  in  the  vicious  circle  of  reaction,  this 
tactic  is  consistent  with  a  certain  amount  of  concen- 
tration upon  one  or  two  positions  of  outstanding 

162 


THE  NEW  ECONOMIC  SITUATION        163 

strength.  In  this  sense  it  is  true  that  the  main 
attack  needs  to  be  made  upon  the  vested  interests 
of  improperty  in  the  control  of  politics  and  industry 
after  the  war. 

Several  definite  issues  related  to  economic  recon- 
struction must  come  up  without  delay  into  the  fore- 
front of  the  battle.     The  first  demand  will  be  that 
the  State  shall  not  suddenly  or  rapidly  let  down  the 
volume  of  demand  for  labour  by  stopping  public 
expenditure  at  a  time  when  the  labour  markets  will 
be  flushed  by  a  rapid  return  of  men  from  the  fighting 
forces  into  industry.     During  the  latter  part  of  the 
war  more  than  half  the  wage-earners  will  have  been 
directly  or  indirectly  employed  in  providing  goods 
and  services  for  the  State.     Any  rapid  cessation  of 
this  demand  for  labour  would  not  merely  bring  about 
a  temporary  turmoil,  as  the  displaced  workers  were 
scrambling  for  private  jobs,  but  would  create  a  far 
graver  situation,  supposing  that  private  employment 
did  not  expand  as  largely  or  as  rapidly  as  was  needed 
to  absorb  the  displaced  workers,  together  with  the 
returning    soldiers.     Now,    it    would    be    extremely 
foolish  for  the  Government  to  rely  upon  any  such 
expansion  of  private  employment.      For  though  the 
needs  for  great  activity  in  all  economic  departments, 
agriculture,  mining,  shipbuilding,  the  staple  manu- 
factures, transport  and  commerce,  so  as  to  replace 
the  destruction  and  wastage  of  the  war  and  to  furnish 
to  the  world  those  numerous  supplies  which  have  been 
withheld  or  constricted  for  several  years,  ought  to 
stimulate  to  full  activity  all  the  available  labour  and 
capital  resources  of  this  and  other  nations,  we  cannot 
assume    their    smooth   and    effective    operation.     A 


164         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

dangerous  or  obscure  international  situation,  involving 
great  difficulties  in  forecasting  the  new  trade  currents, 
will  disable  manufacturers  and  traders  engaged  in 
overseas  trade  from  planning  production  and  esti- 
mating prices  with  any  confidence,  or  in  obtaining 
the  credit  necessary  to  carry  on  their  enterprises. 
Even  in  internal  trade,  the  disturbances  in  distribu- 
tion of  wealth  and  in  methods  of  production  and 
consumption  produced  by  the  war  will  leave  their 
impress  in  new  risks  and  a  more  speculative  situation. 
The  whole  financial  system  of  the  world  will  be  left 
quivering  with  the  shocks  of  war,  and  the  changes 
in  ownership  of  securities  will  have  unforeseen  effects 
upon  the  exchanges.  While,  therefore,  we  may 
predict  that  great  efforts  will  be  made  to  produce 
large  quantities  of  ships,  rails,  and  other  forms  of 
wealth  destroyed  by  war,  to  repair  the  public  and 
private  plant  which  has  been  allowed  to  fall  into 
disrepair,  to  resume  with  great  activity  the  suspended 
building  trades,  and  to  restore  the  depleted  stocks 
of  foods,  clothing  and  other  articles,  this  resumption 
of  private  enterprise  cannot  be  relied  upon  to  meet 
the  urgency  of  the  situation.  Even  if  the  required 
plant  and  material  were  available  (which  in  many 
cases  would  not  be  the  case)  and  labour  were  present 
in  abundance,  the  vital  factor  of  business  confidence 
is  likely  to  be  lacking. 

In  fact,  it  is  self-evident  that  any  sudden  lapse 
from  the  State  Socialism  of  war-time,  with  its  enormous 
governmental  control  of  engineering,  agriculture, 
mining,  transport  and  other  vital  industries,  and  its 
correspondingly  enlarged  expenditure,  into  the  pre- 
war conditions,   would  spell  disorder  and  disaster. 


THE  NEW  ECONOMIC  SITUATION        165 

The  State  must  continue  to  retain  a  large  proportion 
of  this  control  and  this  spending  power,  if  unemploy- 
ment, industrial  depression,  a  fall  of  wages  and  some- 
thing like  social  revolution  are  to  be  averted.  If  the 
Government  were  suddenly  to  stop  its  war  contracts 
or  to  reduce  them  with  great  celerity,  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  the  enormous  demand  for 
labour  which  they  represent  would  automatically 
be  transferred  to  private  enterprise. 

An  instinct  of  self-preservation  will,  therefore, 
impel  the  State  to  endeavour  to  retain  after  the  war 
many  of  the  emergency  powers  it  has  acquired  during 
the  war.  Much  of  this  retention  will  have  the  support 
of  popular  opinion.  Though  wealthy  taxpayers  and 
financial  parasites  may  demand  an  early  reduction 
of  public  expenditure  to  something  like  the  pre-war 
level,  the  obvious  necessity  of  safeguarding  employ- 
ment will  support  the  alternative  of  maintaining  a 
large  volume  of  State  expenditure  diverted  from  war 
services  to  peace  services,  i.e.  to  the  performance  of 
those  great  constructive  services  of  social  security 
and  progress  which  hitherto  the  State  has  been  too 
impoverished  or  too  cowardly  to  undertake.  It 
will  henceforth  be  impossible  for  any  Government  to 
say  that  the  country  cannot  afford  the  money  needed 
to  house  the  people  and  to  educate  their  children 
properly,  to  supply  free  medical  and  legal  services, 
adequate  provision  for  old  age  and  unemployment, 
to  develop  the  resources  of  the  land,  set  up  small 
holders,  improve  the  roads  and  canals,  and  assist  the 
municipalities  in  town  planning  and  public  recreation. 

It  is  true  that  the  State  Socialism  of   the  war  has 
been   assisted   by   conditions   of  public   feeling   not 


166         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

available  for  ordinary  times.  People  have  been 
willing  to  pay  taxes,  tolerate  official  interferences, 
work  more  energetically  and  more  smoothly,  from 
patriotism  and  a  sense  of  public  danger.  Much  of 
the  old  distrust  of  the  State,  and  particularly  its 
fiscal  exactions,  will  return  with  peace.  Revelations 
of  official  blundering,  extravagance  and  corruption, 
will  be  rife  throughout  the  business  world.  Both 
among  the  employing  and  the  working  classes  there 
will  be  a  disposition  to  shake  off  the  new  fetters. 
But  that  disposition  will  be  countered  and  overborne 
by  the  pressure  of  new  economic  and  political  move- 
ments. Though  many  of  the  irksome  and  unpopular 
powers  of  the  State  in  the  way  of  sumptuary  laws 
and  police  regulations  will  doubtless  disappear,  the 
general  development  of  State  economic  functions 
will  remain.  The  war  will  have  advanced  State 
Socialism  by  half  a  century.  The  national  control 
of  railways  and  the  unification  of  the  railway  system 
cannot  be  undone,  and  must  lead  to  complete  national- 
ization. The  coal  and  iron  mines  of  the  country 
and  the  coal  trade  are  not  likely  to  return  to  pre-war 
conditions.  Together  with  such  trades  as  engineering, 
shipbuilding,  and  chemicals,  they  will  be  recognized 
as  "  national "  industries,  in  the  sense  that  the 
Government  will  be  made  responsible  for  ensuring 
their  best  productivity,  satisfactory  conditions  for 
labour,  and  reasonable  prices.  Whether  the  perform- 
ance of  these  obligations  entails  public  ownership 
and  management,  or  is  consistent  with  some  system 
of  cartels  or  syndicates,  with  State  representation 
and  suzerainty,  remains  an  open  question.  But, 
in  any  case,  the  old  condition  of  private  profiteering, 


THE  NEW  ECONOMIC  SITUATION        167 

with  a  fluctuating  policy  of  cut-throat  competition 
and  secret  combination,  cannot  return.  Nor  is  it 
less  certain  that  State  Socialism  will  make  a  distinct 
invasion  into  the  domain  of  landed  property  and 
agriculture.  The  development  of  domestic  food 
supplies,  the  encouragement  of  a  rural  population, 
schemes  of  afforestation  and  reclamation  of  waste 
lands,  town  planning,  taxation  of  land  values,  as  an 
instrument  of  local  and  national  revenue,  must  all 
contribute  to  this  end.  War  experience  will  probably 
not  leave  the  liquor  trade  in  private  hands.  The 
experience  of  finance  during  the  last  three  years  will 
have  brought  the  issues  of  national  banking  and 
national  insurance  into  the  forefront  of  practical 
State  Socialism.  It  will  no  longer  be  considered 
safe  or  expedient  to  allow  the  supply  of  money,  in 
its  modern  form  of  credit,  to  be  regulated  by  the 
arbitrary  will  of  bankers  and  financiers  for  their 
personal  gain,  with  the  right  to  call  upon  the  State 
to  rescue  them  in  times  of  peril  and  to  place  huge  war 
profits  to  their  private  accounts.  The  nationalization 
of  banking  and  insurance  should  be  a  natural  outcome 
of  the  new  situation. 

These  two  extensions  of  the  functions  of  the  State 
for 

(1)  The  supply  of  fuller  public  services  to  the 
people  in  their  general  capacity  of  producer- 
consumers, 

(2)  The  enlargement  of  State  ownership  and 
administration  in  various  special  economic  fields, 

will  necessarily  be  accompanied  by  a  third  extension 
in  the  shape  of  a  large  increase  of  taxing  power. 


i68        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

However  successful  the  State  may  prove  itself  to  be 
in  the  administration  of  the  new  public  businesses 
and  properties  it  takes  over,  it  is  not  likely  that  they 
can  advantageously  be  made  to  contribute  more  than 
a  small  share  of  the  costs  of  the  new  State.  One  of 
the  sharpest  and  most  controversial  issues  which 
must  arise  after  the  war  will,  therefore,  relate  to 
methods  of  taxation.  The  need  of  providing  the 
interest  and  sinking  fund  for  the  war-borrowing,  the 
heavy  temporary  costs  of  demobilization  and  indus- 
trial resettlement,  the  permanent  pensions  fund,  and 
the  maintenance  for  some  years  at  any  rate  of  an 
expenditure  on  armaments  higher  than  the  pre-war 
level,  will  require  a  yield  from  taxes  at  least  as  high 
as  the  550  millions  estimated  to  be  the  yield  for  1916- 
17.  Primd  facie  the  bulk  of  this  taxation  must 
be  imposed  upon  the  well-to-do,  the  "  capitalist  " 
classes.  It  will,  however,  be  to  their  interest  to  shift 
as  much  of  it  as  they  can  on  to  the  workers  by  indirect 
taxation,  accompanied  by  a  reduction  of  the  income- 
tax  exemption  limit,  so  as  to  bring  in  the  better  paid 
artisans,  miners  and  other  workers  who,  to  meet  the 
rise  of  prices,  have  secured  higher  money  wages. 
The  chief  indirect  taxation  proposed  by  the  capitalists 
will  take  the  shape  of  protective  duties  upon  imports. 
Protection  will,  of  course,  have  this  double  advantage 
for  the  capitalists.  It  will  relieve  them  of  a  portion 
of  the  taxes  which  otherwise  must  come  out  of  their 
pockets  and  put  it  on  the  working-class  consumers. 
But  it  will  confer  on  them  the  greater  gain  of  better 
combination  for  control  of  the  national  market,  and 
the  enlarged  profits  derived  from  the  raised  prices 
at  which  they  will  be  able  to  sell  their  whole  supplies. 


THE  NEW  ECONOMIC  SITUATION        169 

Thus  the  manufacturing,  agricultural  and  trading 
interests,  not  mainly  dependent  upon  export  trade, 
will  make  a  vigorous  attempt  to  put  high  protection 
on  the  country  under  the  guise  of  national  security, 
imperial  unity,  punishment  of  Germany  and  mainten- 
ance of  the  Alliance.  If  they  can  succeed  in  this 
design,  and  can  keep  down  vexatious  State  interfer- 
ence with  the  new  combinations  which  the  war 
experiments  backed  by  tariffs  will  enable  them  to 
form,  they  may  be  able  to  shift  on  to  "  the  masses  " 
a  large  proportion  of  the  burden  of  taxation.  If 
this  project  were  launched  under  its  own  name  and 
alone,  it  would  have  no  chance  of  success.  In  vain 
is  the  net  spread  within  the  sight  of  any  bird.  It  will 
therefore  be  necessary  to  try  to  divide  democracy 
and  to  protect  Protection  by  surrounding  it  with 
other  more  attractive  appeals  to  labour.  This  will 
be  done  by  the  new  Prussian-Australianism  which 
Mr.  Lloyd  George  will  probably  introduce  and  for 
which  he  will  secure  the  support  of  his  captured 
Labour  men.  By  Prussian-Australianism  I  mean  a 
combination  of  the  capitalist-bureaucratic  organiza- 
tion of  industry  and  commerce  practised  in  modern 
Germany  with  the  nationalist-labour  policy  of 
Australia.  What  our  capitalists  will  want  is  Pro- 
tection and  high  productivity  of  labour.  This  high 
productivity  they  now  know  to  be  technically  and 
humanly  feasible,  provided  they  can  get  the  assent 
of  the  workers  to  continue  after  the  war  the  suspen- 
sion of  regulations  restricting  output  and  to  accept 
dilution  and  other  improvements  in  the  organization 
of  labour.  In  order  to  purchase  these  conditions  of 
profitable  capitalism,  the  State  in  direct  co-operation 


170        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

with  syndicates  of  employers  will  probably  propose 
a  system  of  guaranteed  standard  wages,  unemployed 
insurance  and  pensions,  with  some  joint  boards  of 
national  industry  for  the  settlement  of  issues  affecting 
the  welfare  of  labour.  Even  the  capitalists  of  the 
great  export  trades,  who  do  not  favour  Protection, 
will  support  the  main  structure  of  this  Prussian- 
Australianism  as  the  best  method  of  securing  the 
harmonious  and  profitable  working  of  capitalism 
under  the  new  order. 


CHAPTER   III 

TWO  PROBLEMS  FOR  LABOUR 

This  new  situation,  arranged  by  a  skilful  coalition 
of     capitalists    and    politicians,    will    present    two 
problems    of    supreme    importance    to    democracy. 
What    attitude    shall    the  workers    adopt    towards 
proposals  for  increased    productivity  ?     What  atti- 
tude towards  the  State  as  controller  of  industry  ? 
These    two    problems,  as  will   presently  be   shown, 
are  not  independent   of   one    another.     But  it  will 
be    well    to    approach   them    by   the    way   of    the 
demand    for    higher    productivity.     Now,    here    at 
the  outset   we   are  met  by  deep   suspicion   on   the 
part   of    labour.      Increased   productivity   and   the 
means    of    attaining    it,    i.e.    dilution    of     labour, 
"  scientific     management/'     premium     bonus     and 
profit-sharing,    workshop    committees,   etc.,    are,    it 
will  be   contended,    a  capitalist   dodge  for    getting 
more  out  of  labour  !     In  many  labour  quarters  there 
exists   a    disposition   to   lump   together   for   whole- 
sale  condemnation,   without   examination,   all   pro- 
posals which  appear  to  be  designed  to  make  industry 
more  productive.     Even  in  pleading  for  a  suspension 
of  this  judgment  and  for  more  discrimination,  I  shall 
here  run  the  risk  of  being  suspected  of  playing  the 

capitalist  game.     Nevertheless,  it  is  certain  that  if 

171 


172         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

any  industrial  democracy,  carrying  a  substantial 
improvement  in  the  life  of  labour,  is  to  be  achieved, 
great  advances  in  the  productivity  of  labour  are 
necessary.  The  assumption  that  this  necessarily 
involves  a  painful  or  injurious  intensification  of  toil 
on  the  part  of  the  workers  is  unwarranted.  Increased 
productivity  of  industry  is  not  synonymous  with 
increased  toil,  though  this  may  seem  to  follow  from 
a  narrowly  conceived  idea  of  labour  as  the  source  of 
all  wealth.  Improved  organization  of  labour,  the 
invention  and  application  of  better  machinery  and 
power,  better  methods  of  transport  and  marketing, 
access  to  better  and  more  abundant  materials,  more 
intelligence  and  enterprise  in  the  management,  all 
these  and  many  other  factors  contribute  to  enlarged 
productivity.  But  let  it  be  granted  that  the  full 
fruits  of  these  other  economies  are  in  no  small  measure 
dependent  upon  the  willingness  of  workers  to  remit 
some  of  those  rules  or  usages  which  in  the  past  have 
tended  to  restrict  output  and  to  hamper  the  best 
utilization  of  the  available  supplies  of  labour  for 
producing  wealth.  Is  organized  labour  going  to  use 
all  its  strength  to  secure  a  complete  reversion  to  its 
pre-war  attitude,  while  at  the  same  time  seeking 
to  demand  the  retention  and  a  further  advance  of 
the  higher  standard  of  wages  and  of  living  established 
during  war-time  in  most  favoured  trades  ?  In  other 
words,  is  it  going  to  hamper  efforts  after  increased 
productivity,  directing  its  efforts  solely  to  securing 
for  labour  a  larger  share  of  the  unenlarged  body  of 
wealth,  or  will  it  throw  itself  into  the  work  of  increas- 
ing the  national  output  while  at  the  same  time  using 
its   economic   and   political   powers   to   convert   the 


TWO  PROBLEMS  FOR  LABOUR        173 

increased  wealth  into  higher  wages,  more  freedom, 
better  health,  education  and  other  opportunities  for 
the  nation  as  a  whole  ?  Let  me  briefly  state  the  case 
for  the  latter  policy. 

The  bad  and  unjust  distribution  of  national  wealth 
which  has  hitherto  prevailed  is  not  the  only  vice  of 
our  economic  system.  Even  had  the  pre-war  income 
been  equally  distributed  throughout  the  nation, 
there  would  not  have  been  enough  to  secure  for  the 
average  family  the  full  requirements  of  a  civilized 
modern  life.  If,  after  the  war,  we  simply  restored 
the  pre-war  output,  reckoned  at  a  maximum  income 
of  2,400  million  pounds  per  annum,  we  could  not, 
even  supposing  that  all  rents,  interest,  profits  and 
high  salaries  were  thrown  into  the  common  stock, 
make  a  fully  adequate  provision  for  the  popular 
well-being.  At  least  400  millions,  or  one-sixth  of 
the  whole  income,  would  be  required  to  take  the  shape 
of  savings  for  the  new  capital,  which  under  any 
economic  system,  socialist  or  profiteering,  would 
remain  necessary  in  order  to  provide  for  the  growing 
population  and  requirements  of  the  future.  A  further 
400  millions,  at  least,  must  go  for  purposes  of  national 
and  local  government,  even  assuming  that  no  new 
social  functions  were  undertaken  by  the  State,  no 
increased  military  expenditure  required,  and  that 
the  whole  burden  of  war-borrowings  was  cancelled 
by  taxing  the  classes  who  had  lent,  so  as  to  pay  their 
interest  and  the  sinking  fund.  Now,  1,600  millions' 
worth  of  goods  and  services,  the  real  available  net 
income,  would  not,  distributed  evenly  among  the 
population  of  the  United  Kingdom,  reckoned  approxi- 
mately at  47  millions,  yield  more  than  £34  per  person, 


174        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

or  £136  for  an  average  family  of  four.  It  is,  therefore, 
evident  that,  even  had  all  the  capitalistic  pulls  upon 
this  income  been  annulled,  the  amount  of  national 
productivity  was  not  adequate  to  supply  the  full 
requirements  of  a  progressive  people.  A  civilized 
Briton  wants  and  can  make  good  use  of  more  than 
can  be  bought  for  £34  a  year. 

The  actual  issue  of  productivity  presented  to  the 
workers  will,  however,  be  far  more  acute.     A  mere 
return  to  pre-war  productivity  would  seem  to  leave  the 
workers  worse  off  than  before  the  war,  and  definitely 
worse  off  than  the  bulk  of  them  have  been  during  the 
most  prosperous  period  of  the  war  itself.     For  the 
normal  play  of  economic  forces  will  tell  against  them 
in  their  struggle  for  a  larger  proportion  of  the  product. 
New   capital   will   be   relatively   scarce   and   labour 
relatively  abundant.     This  means  that  interest  and 
profit  will  tend  to  be  high,  wages  to  be  low.     The 
damaged  organization  of  labour  during  the  war  will 
facilitate  this  tendency  to  a  fall  of  real  wages,  though 
the  fall  may  be  partly  concealed  by  the  maintenance 
of  a  high  level  of  money  wages.     If,  as  is  possible, 
the  difficulty  of  making  the  pent-up  world-demand  for 
goods  rapidly  effective  causes  a  fall  in  prices,  the 
attempt  to  reduce  wages  from  this  high  war-level 
will  arouse  struggles  of  unprecedented  violence,  with 
stoppages  of  industry  that  will  seriously  diminish 
the  national  productivity.     No  temporary  victories 
in  such  struggles  can  really  serve  to  win  for  labour 
what   it   wants — more   wealth,    more   leisure,    more 
security,  more  opportunities  of  life.     So  far  as  ordinary 
private  industry  is  concerned,   it  is  impossible  to 
reduce  the  market  rate  of  interest  and  profit  in  the 


TWO  PROBLEMS  FOR  LABOUR        175 

business  world  raised  by  the  new  conditions  of  short- 
age of  capital,  and  to  take  this  sum  for  the  workers 
in  enhanced  wages.     The  attempt  to  do  this  is  an 
attempt  to  apply  suddenly  in  the  world  of  private 
profiteering  enterprise  principles  of  distribution  only 
applicable  in  a  fully  socialized  community.     Refuse 
the  new  capital  that  is  required  its  high  market  rate, 
and  one  of  two  things  happens.     Either  it  refuses  to 
come  into  existence  (capitalists  preferring  to  spend 
their  income  rather  than  to  save  it  at  a  low  reward), 
or  else  it  travels  abroad  and  applies  itself  to  work  in 
Argentina,  Egypt,  India  and  China,  with  labour  that 
is  less   "  exorbitant "   in  its   demands.     Just   here, 
no  doubt,  will  emerge  one  of  the  new  "  nationalist  " 
temptations    which    the    protectionist-militarist-im- 
perialists will  dangle  before  labour,  viz.  an  embargo 
or  tax  upon  the  export  of  capital,  outside  the  Empire 
or  the  Alliance.     This  proposal  will  appear  as  an 
adjunct  of  Protectionism.     Just,  however,  as  it  will 
evoke  the  opposition  of  powerful  financial  and  com- 
mercial  interests   which   have   found   profit   in   the 
development  of  backward  countries,  so  its  superficial 
appeal   to   labour   will   arouse   suspicion   when   the 
"  national  economy  "  of  which  it  is  a  part  is  fully 
comprehended.     The  retention  of  capital  within  the 
country,  conjoined  with  tariff  protection,  will  mean 
the  rapid  and  easy  organization  of  trusts  and  other 
monopolies,  the  absorption  of  more  capital  in  labour- 
saving  machinery  and  the  increased  "  control  "  of 
labour   by  highly  organized   management,   together 
with  a  regulation  of  selling  prices  which  will  place 
once  more  in  the  hands  of  capital  ar*  increased  pull 
on  labour  in  its  capacity  of  consumer. 


176        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

Moreover,  be  it  remembered,  this  "  national 
economy  M  with  its  mixture  of  Protection,  conserva- 
tion of  capital,  guaranteed  maximum  conditions  for 
labour,  is  avowedly  advocated  by  politicians  and 
business  men  as  an  instrument  for  that  very  enhance- 
ment of  productivity  which  the  worker  suspects  as 
a  capitalist  dodge. 

This  tangle  of  cross-issues  and  appeals  can  only  be 
safely  traversed  by  labour  taking  new  soundings  and 
accommodating  its  policy  to  the  new  situation.  I 
claim  to  have  shown  that  a  higher  productivity  of 
industry  than  prevailed  before  the  war  is  necessary, 
and  that  workers  will  be  wise  to  admit  that  a  con- 
siderable increase  of  output  is  an  indispensable 
condition  of  popular  progress.  What  they  have  to 
see  to  is  that  this  increased  productivity  is  accom- 
panied by  two  conditions.  The  first  is  that  there 
must  be  no  net  increase  of  toil  or  painful  effort  on 
the  part  of  labour,  the  second,  that  labour  gets  as 
large  a  share  of  the  increase  as  circumstances  permit. 
Now  by  "  circumstances  "  I  do  not  signify  merely 
the  ordinary  free  play  of  supply  and  demand.  I 
include  the  use  of  political  strength  to  modify  or 
overrule  economic  tendencies.  This  is  where  the 
connection  between  the  two  problems  of  the  attitude 
of  labour  towards  increased  productivity  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  State,  upon  the  other,  comes  in.  If 
the  State  be  left  out  of  account,  I  admit  that  it  will 
be  very  difficult  for  labour  after  the  war  to  have  any 
security  for  obtaining  the  advantages  of  any  increased 
productivity  it  may  be  asked  to  promote.  The 
presumption,  we  have  seen,  is  in  favour  of  capital 
taking  the  lion's  share  of  this  after-war  product, 


TWO  PROBLEMS  FOR  LABOUR         177 

and,  even  if  the  workers  get  something  out  of  the 
enlarged  product  in  actual  wages,  they  could  hardly 
look  forward  to  any  really  considerable  improvement 
of  their  condition. 

It  seems,  therefore,  evident  that  the  workers' 
share  of  increased  productivity  must  depend  largely 
or  mainly  upon  State  policy.  In  the  first  place,  the 
State  will  be  the  employer  of  labour  over  vast  new 
fields  of  industry.  If,  as  seems  likely,  the  railways, 
canals,  and  dockyards,  a  large  proportion  of  the 
shipping  and  shipbuilding  trades,  the  coal  and  iron 
mines,  the  munition  and  a  large  section  of  the  engineer- 
ing trades,  the  liquor  trade,  together  with  insurance 
and  banking,  either  become  fully  public  industries 
or  remain  under  strong  State  control,  as  occupations 
of  definitely  "  national  importance,' '  all  questions 
affecting  the  conditions  of  labour,  wages,  hours, 
discipline,  demarcation  and  settlement  of  disputes, 
assume  a  directly  political  aspect.  Since  these 
trades  comprise  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  best 
organized  employments,  the  whole  labour  situation 
will  be  transformed  thereby.  The  bargaining  for 
improved  conditions  of  employment  will  no  longer 
be  between  trade-unions  and  private  employers,  but 
between  trade-unions  and  the  State.  Even  if  some 
halfway  house  is  found,  as  in  the  present  arrangement 
in  the  railways  and  in  the  other  controlled  industries, 
where  the  direct  management  remains  in  private 
hands,  the  intervention  of  the  State  in  all  critical 
decisions  may  be  expected,  and  both  parties  will 
certainly  invoke  the  political  forces  open  to  their 
influence.  Even  where  the  industries  are  left  in 
other  respects  to  private  enterprise,  an  increasing 

12 


178        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

tendency  for  the  State  to  intervene  in  labour  con- 
tracts, and  in  matters  of  hygiene  and  accident,  for 
the  protection  of  the  interests  of  labour,  will 
certainly  be  manifested.  Before  the  war  the  fixing 
of  minimum  piece  wages  by  Trade  Boards  in  an 
increasing  number  of  "  sweated  trades"  was  accom- 
panied by  proposals  to  extend  the  same  method  to 
the  great  national  industry  of  agriculture. 

But  these  are  not  the  only  urgent  issues  between 
labour  and  the  State.  The  issue  of  taxation  we  have 
recognized  as  vital.  Even  were  the  State  called 
upon  to  undertake  no  new  expenditure  on  education 
and  other  social  services,  we  see  that  every  year  the 
Government  will  take  something  like  a  tithe  of  the 
whole  year's  product  and  hand  it  over  to  a  class  of 
investors,  not  as  payment  for  the  use  of  current 
capital,  but  as  blood  money.  The  burden  of  this 
new  parasitism  will  add  greatly  to  the  total  proportion 
of  the  product  passing  to  the  capitalist  class,  unless 
taxation  can  be  so  applied  that  the  full  incidence  of 
the  burden  falls  upon  the  capitalist  classes  themselves. 
This  would  probably  involve  an  income  tax  upon  a 
considerably  higher  level  than  that  of  the  war  period, 
because  the  separate  large  contribution  from  war 
profits  will  no  longer  be  available.  It  is  no  doubt 
possible  that  the  railways,  the  post  office,  insurance 
and  other  nationalized  services  may  be  operated  so 
as  to  yield  a  considerable  income,  independently  of 
taxation,  to  the  State.  But  it  is  exceedingly  unlikely 
that  such  income  will  accrue  to  any  large  extent 
during  the  early  years  of  the  new  experiments.  It 
is  more  likely  that  considerable  new  capital  outlays 
will  be  needed.     The  struggle  of  capitalism  to  shift 


TWO  PROBLEMS  FOR  LABOUR        179 

the  great  new  burden  of  war  taxes  on  to  the  people 
by  "  broadening  the  basis  of  taxation  M  and  to  stamp 
upon  new  proposals  of  public  expenditure  for  educa- 
tional and  economic  developments  will,  therefore, 
mark  a  new  era  in  fiscal  politics.  In  this  struggle 
organized  labour  must  take  a  hand.  For  the  mainten- 
ance of  a  high  standard  of  public  expenditure  on 
socially  productive  services  and  the  issue  of  the 
methods  of  taxation,  by  which  the  ever-growing 
public  revenue  is  to  be  obtained,  are  of  fundamental 
importance  to  democracy. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE   CONQUEST   OF   THE    STATE 

Summarizing  the  economic  situation  as  it  confronts 
the  people,  we  recognize  that  new  economic  functions 
of  the  State  will  be  needed  to  stimulate  and  support 
the  full  employment  and  the  high  productivity 
required  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  situation — 

(i)  To  pay  the  high  interest  for  capital  in 
private  industry  and  for  war  debts, 

(2)  To  furnish  a  high  standard  of  real  wages 
and  leisure, 

(3)  To  meet  the  enlarged  requirements  of  a 
progressive  State  in  the  provision  of  social 
services. 

This  being  the  situation,  the  disposition  in  some 
labour  quarters  to  give  the  go-by  to  the  State,  as  a 
capitalist  instrument,  and  to  fall  back  upon  new  plans 
of  co-operation,  trade-unionism,  syndicalism  or  gild 
Socialism,  in  which  the  State  either  plays  no  part  or 
one  of  relative  unimportance,  is  seen  to  be  as  indefen- 
sible as  the  disposition  to  reject  the  movement 
towards  increased  productivity.  Whatever  may  be 
the  vices  of  a  capitalist  State,   there  is  only  one 

remedy,  viz.  to  convert  it  into  a  democratic  State. 

180 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        181 

The  vision  of  a  working-class  organization  building 
up  for  itself  an  economic  State,  governed  by  the 
workers  and  for  the  workers,  within  the  political 
State  but  virtually  independent  of  that  State  for  the 
regulation  of  economic  life,  is  a  dangerous  phantasy. 
That  syndicalism  and  the  idea  of  the  self-governing 
workshop  can  make  a  genuine  and  important  contri- 
bution to  the  structural  reform  of  business  is  every- 
where winning  admission.  Experience  of  State 
management  and  intervention  during  the  war  will 
certainly  have  strengthened  the  claim  for  direct  and 
powerful  representation  of  the  workers  in  the  control 
of  businesses  more  rightly  regarded  as  "  belonging 
to  "  them  than  to  the  owners  of  the  capital  invested 
in  them.  But,  while  the  old  rigidity  of  State  Socialism 
must  be  relaxed  to  allow  for  the  more  human  interpre- 
tation, the  idea  that  the  State  and  its  officials  can 
be  kept  out,  or  relegated  to  some  unimportant  place 
in  the  working  of  industrial  democracy,  is  quite 
untenable.  The  economic  and  the  political  systems 
of  the  nation  are  destined  to  be  more  intimately 
interwoven  than  ever.  The  notion  of  two  States, 
one  a  federation  of  trades  and  gilds,  running  the 
whole  body  of  economic  arrangements  for  the  nation 
by  representative  committees  based  upon  common 
interests  of  industry,  the  other  a  political  State, 
running  the  services  related  to  internal  and  external 
order,  and  only  concerned  to  intervene  in  economic 
affairs  at  a  few  reserved  points  of  contact,  will  not 
bear  criticism.  It  is  commonly  bred  of  political 
despair,  the  feeling  that  the  creation  of  a  genuinely 
democratic  State  in  which  the  will  and  interests  of 
the  people  shall  be  really  paramount  is  either  an 


182         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

impossibility,  or  an  ideal  too  remote  for  practical 
consideration.1 

But,  if  the  common  people  are  to  have  any  power 
over  their  material  and  moral  destiny,  they  must 
obtain  the  mastery  of  the  political  State  and  make  it 
into  a  State  whose  officials  they  can  trust  to  do  their 
will  and  secure  their  interests.     They  cannot,  in  any 
case,  stay  the  process  of  State  Socialism  and  the 
undertaking  of  an  increasing  number  of  important 
economic    functions    by    the    State.     If,    therefore, 
they  throw  their  efforts  mainly  into  non-political 
organizations,    they   will   see   these   new   functions, 
including  such  vital  services  as  transport  and  credit, 
passing  under  the  power  of  officials  subservient  to  the 
profiteering  interests  that  control  the  present  State. 
Their  present  well-justified  suspicion  of  the  State 
should  be  the  chief  incentive  to  the  task  of  democratiz- 
ing it.     Take  a  single  test.     Under  present  circum- 
stances working  men  who  recognize  the  folly  and 
the  criminality  of   wars  between   nations,   and  are 
anxious  to   endow  some  international   Government 
with  powers  to  compel  settlement  by  equitable  pro- 
cesses of  arbitration,  are  vehemently  opposed  to  the 
introduction  of  any  analogous  process  of  compulsory 
arbitration  into  industrial  disputes.    Why  ?  we  ask. 
Why  should  a  group  of  employees  and  employers  in 
some  single  trade,  such  as  mining  or  railways,  disput- 
ing about  the  interpretation  of  a  wage  agreement  or 
some  other  matter  affecting  their  special  interests, 

1  A  more  recent  project  for  government  by  joint  committees  of 
gild  representatives  and  the  State,  regarded  as  a  Consumers' 
League,  is  an  interesting  endeavour  to  reconcile  the  inevitable 
opposition  of  economic  interests. 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        183 

be  allowed  to  involve  in  hardship,  loss  or  ruin  the 
members  of  other  trades  and  the  whole  body  of 
consumers,  because  they  insist  on  fighting  out  the 
issue  by  force  instead  to  submitting  it  to  a  public 
process  of  justice  ?  The  answer  is,  of  course,  not 
that  the  workers  who  insist  upon  the  right  to  strike 
really  believe  that  this  is  the  ideal  way  of  settling 
disputes,  but  because  they  distrust  the  principles, 
the  processes  and  the  persons  who  would  represent 
the  State  in  an  arbitration.  Until  a  democratic 
State  is  won,  industrial  peace  must,  therefore,  remain 
impossible,  and  the  general  public  must  submit  to 
the  growing  perils  and  damages  of  an  industrial 
warfare  within  the  nation  which  will  become  more 
bitter  and  more  injurious  as  the  forces  of  capital  and 
labour  become  better  organized,  as  has  happened  in 
military  warfare. 

Industrial  and  social  safety  and  progress,  therefore, 
demand  the  successful  capture  of  the  State  by  the 
people.  This  does  not  only  or  chiefly  mean  the 
predominant  power  of  a  Labour  or  a  "  populist  " 
party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  with  power  to  compel 
the  Government  to  adopt  democratic  measures.  A 
thoroughly  democratic  franchise  is  of  course  a  first 
essential  to  any  effective  exercise  of  the  people's  will. 
The  reform  proposals  in  our  electoral  system  must 
not  merely  add  more  power  to  the  parliamentary 
machine,  but  must  greatly  improve  the  quality  and 
the  direction  of  that  power.  When  women  are 
admitted  to  their  full  rights  and  duties  as  electors 
and  representatives,  the  great  preservative  and 
constructive  powers  which  belong  to  their  sex  in  the 
general  economy  of  nature  will  for  the  first  time  make 


184        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

their  impress  upon  the  art  of  politics.  The  sheer 
magnitude  of  this  new  contribution,  changing  as  it 
may  the  very  texture  of  all  governmental  processes, 
cannot  be  estimated. 

But  the  stress  laid  upon  the  more  showy  character 
of  elections,  parliamentary  representation  and  legis- 
lative action,  must  not  be  allowed  to  hide  from  us 
the  important  truth  that,  as  the  governmental 
machinery  of  a  great  modern  State  grows  in  com- 
plexity, more  and  more  of  the  real  governing  power 
is  of  necessity  vested  in  administrative  officials. 
Most  modern  laws  are  merely  rough  sketches,  leaving 
the  important  concrete  substance  to  be  filled  in  by 
Orders  in  Council  or  departmental  fiats.  The  private 
personal  opinions,  sentiments,  interests  and  attach- 
ments of  the  first-class  clerks  of  the  Civil  services 
and  their  legal  advisers  are,  therefore,  of  determinant 
importance.  Now  the  drafting,  the  filling  in  and  the 
administration  of  Acts  of  Parliament  are  performed 
by  men  who  for  the  most  part  are  born  in  well-to-do 
families  and  have  throughout  their  life  consorted 
exclusively  with  members  of  the  upper  classes.  The 
same  is  true  of  the  higher  and  lower  grades  of  the 
judiciary,  before  whom  come  for  decision  disputed 
issues  of  law  and  fact.  The  profession  to  which  all 
the  members  of  the  higher  Courts  belong  is,  as  we 
have  recognized,  in  its  social  status  and  associations 
the  most  aristocratic  and  plutocratic  of  all,  and  the 
anti-popular  bias  exhibited  by  highly  paid  and 
virtually  immovable  judges  constitutes  a  grave 
scandal  to  the  common  cause  of  justice.  The  small 
leaven  of  working-class  representatives  in  the  local 
magistracy  goes  a  very  little  way  towards  mitigating 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        185 

the  grievance,  which  is  at  every  stage  worsened  by 
the  inability  of  the  working-class  complainant  or 
defendant  to  pay  the  heavy  costs  of  contesting  his 
case  on  equal  terms  with  his  Wealthier  opponent. 
This  wrong  is  particularly  flagrant  in  cases  relating 
to  disputes  between  workman  and  employer,  where 
the  lack  of  power  to  stand  the  costs  and  risks  of 
an  appeal  to  a  higher  and  a  more  expensive  court 
virtually  extinguishes  whole  grades  of  justice. 

Political  democracy,  if  it  is  to  come  into  effective 
being,  must  grapple  successfully  with  this  situation. 
Men  fairly  representative  of  the  common  interests 
of  the  people  must  be  substituted  at  the  focal  points 
for  the  present  guardians  of  class  interests.  The 
Civil  services,  the  judiciary  and  the  magistracy  as 
well  as  the  legislature,  must  be  manned  by  men  of  the 
people,  if  we  are  to  have  anything  better  than  the 
sham  self-government  which  has  hitherto  prevailed 
in  the  so-called  liberal  nations  of  the  Western  worlpp 
Now,  no  sudden  popular  upheaval  of  democratic 
sentiment  expressing  itself  at  a  general  election  can 
achieve  this.  It  stresses  a  democratic  need  that  is 
not  primarily  economic  or  political,  tne  need  of 
education.  As  long  as  the  reactionary  forces  can 
keep  the  people  from  getting  a  liberal  education,  they 
may  look  with  complacency  upon  every  democratic 
movement.  So  long  as  they  can  keep  down  the 
common  schooling  to  the  level  needed  for  the  clerk 
or  shop-assistant,  with  information  and  intelligence 
nicely  adapted  to  the  suggestions  of  their  cheap  Press, 
they  have  got  "  the  people  "  in  hand.  Half  a  century 
ago  they  were  foolishly  afraid  of  a  popular  franchise 
and  the  machinery  of  democracy.     They  know  better 


186        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

now.  That  is  why  a  Speaker's  Conference  of  Liberal 
and  Tory  members  of  Parliament  was  willing  to  make 
large  new  advances  towards  popular  representation 
upon  a  basis  of  adult  suffrage.  Experience  has  taught 
them  that  the  working-class  movement  in  politics  is 
innocuous  so  long  as  the  mind  it  expresses  is  the  mind 
of  a  mob.  Their  party  machinery,  their  Press,  their 
handling  of  political  and  social  issues,  have  been 
continually  directed  to  making  and  preserving  a 
mob-mind,  fluid,  sensational,  indeterminate,  short- 
sighted, credulous,  uncritical.  In  such  a  mentality 
there  is  no  will  of  the  people.  Under  such  conditions 
it  is  easy  for  the  ruling  and  possessing  classes  to  con- 
fuse the  electorate  by  dangling  before  their  eyes 
specious  but  unsubstantial  benefits,  to  divide  them 
by  conflicting  appeals  to  trade  or  locality,  to  subject 
to  undetected  mutilation  any  really  inconvenient  or 
dangerous  reform,  and,  in  the  last  resort,  to  drag 
across  the  path  of  policy  some  great  inflammatory 
national  appeal  to  passion.  Until  the  people  evolve 
an  intelligent  will  capable  of  resisting  these  influences, 
a  real  democracy  continues  to  be  impossible. 

Better  and  purer  education  is  the  first  essential. 
This  does  not  imply  a  high  standard  of  intellectual 
culture  generally  diffused  throughout  the  people. 
We  need  not  deceive  ourselves  by  false  assumptions 
of  equality  in  human  nature.  It  may  well  be  the  case 
that  the  majority  in  every  grade  of  society  is  not 
susceptible  to  the  appeal  of  a  definitely  intellectual 
life.  What  is  needed  is  such  free  access  to  intellec- 
tual opportunities  as  shall  produce  in  every  social 
environment  a  considerable  minority  of  able  and 
informed  minds,  and  a  majority  whose  minds  are 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        187 

sufficiently  intelligent  to  choose,  to  trust  and  to 
follow  the  leadership  of  this  intellectual  minority. 
Common  sense  for  the  many,  a  wide  intellectual 
outlook  for  the  few,  and  a  popular  will  to  which  both 
contribute — these  are  the  requirements.  Though 
the  organized  instruction  of  schools  and  colleges  only 
forms  a  part  of  the  needed  education  (mainly  com- 
prised of  personal  experience  in  the  home,  the 
workshop  and  the  neighbourhood) ,  it  is  an  exceedingly 
important  part  for  the  purpose  which  we  are  immedi- 
ately considering,  viz.  political  power.  For  a  new 
series  of  conflicts  is  going  on  to  be  fought  round  the 
Education  Question.  We  have  already  seen  that  the 
ruling  and  possessing  classes  recognize  the  necessity 
of  some  sort  of  higher  education  for  those  whom  in 
playful  derision  they  have  called  "  their  masters/' 
The  modern  technique  of  capitalism  demands,  not 
only  a  larger  measure  of  specialized  manual  skill, 
but  some  slight  scientific  knowledge  and  some  trained 
capacity  of  thinking,  for  large  numbers  of  employees. 
Employers  have  learned  that  high  technical  efficiency 
requires  some  cultivation  of  general  intelligence. 
Their  problem,  as  we  saw,  is  to  prevent  this  education 
of  general  intelligence  from  becoming  a  source  of 
dangerous  class  consciousness.  This  can  be  done, 
their  educationalists  think,  by  introducing  certain 
"  wholesome  "  influences  into  the  processes  of  educa- 
tion and  producing  a  certain  atmosphere.  This 
issue  is  no  novel  one.  The  hold  of  the  Churches  on 
the  schools  has  always  had  as  one  of  its  aims  the 
use  of  spiritual  soporifics  to  allay  the  discontent  of 
the  poor  with  their  humble  status.  This  has  been  the 
special  service  always  rendered  by  the  Church  to  the 


188         DEMOCRACY   AFTER  THE  WAR 

ruling  classes  in  the  State.  But  the  reactionists, 
recognizing  that  religion  has  lost  a  good  deal  of  its 
ancient  hold  upon  the  masses,  plan  a  more  audacious 
policy.  They  propose  to  impose  their  own  social 
dogmas,  militarism,  imperialism,  Protectionism,  ex- 
clusive nationalism,  as  a  new  religion  upon  the 
teaching  and  discipline  of  the  schools  of  the  people. 
Everywhere  in  the  teaching  of  history,  geography 
or  literature,  the  emotional  bias  of  "  patriotism  "  is 
to  prevail,  while  the  elements  of  civics  and  even  of 
biology  are  to  be  exploited  so  as  to  impress  class 
discipline,  national  pride,  the  duty  of  prolific  parent- 
age, race  hostility,  and  to  divide  popular  solidarity 
at  every  stage  by  presenting  life  as  a  competitive 
struggle  instead  of  a  human  co-operation.  Not  only 
is  this  "  religion  "  to  pervade  our  teaching,  but  it  is 
to  be  enforced  by  military  and  patriotic  rites  and 
exercises  upon  the  plastic  mind  of  the  young  citizen. 
This  Prussic  acid  is  already  being  pumped  into  our 
boys  and  girls,  with  the  object  of  quenching  the  spirit 
of  liberty  in  thought  and  action.  The  human  mind 
is  not  to  be  trained  to  the  free  handling  of  facts  and 
their  disinterested  interpretation,  but  to  be  cribbed, 
cabined  and  confined  by  the  acceptance  of  a  selected, 
distorted  and  impassioned  view  of  the  world  in  which 
we  live  and  our  conduct  in  it.  Military  drill,  the 
worship  of  the  flag,  Empire  Day,  and  other  "  national " 
saints'  days,  the  whole  tenor  of  the  esprit  de  corps 
and  the  "  atmosphere  "  of  school  life  are  to  be  directed 
to  produce  effective  fighting  patriotism.  If  reaction- 
ists are  allowed  to  hold  these  intellectual  and  moral 
fortresses,  they  can  afford  to  snap  their  fingers  at  the 
working-class   movement   in   industry   and   politics. 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        189 

For  the  people  will  not  be  able  to  produce  the  minority 
of  liberal-minded  leaders  they  require,  and  the 
common  sense  needed  for  the  compact  majority  of 
followers  will  have  been  poisoned  at  the  source. 

Nor  is  it  only  a  question  of  the  elementary  schools. 
The  whole  system  of  secondary  education  and  the 
new  universities  to  which  the  people  have  access  in 
our  great  industrial  centres  will,  if  permitted,  be 
turned  into  forcing  houses  for  militarism,  imperialism 
and  exclusive  nationalism,  and  the  teaching  of  history, 
economics  and  civics  will  be  insidiously  directed  to 
construct  intellectual  defences  against  the  inroads 
of  democracy.  tTf  democracy  is  to  have  any  chance  of 
survival  and  growth,  the  fight  for  liberty  and  purity 
of  education  must  be  fought  and  won  without  delay. 
For  the  war  will  leave  an  aftermath  of  popular  sus- 
picion, credulity  and  animosity  particularly  favour- 
able to  the  intellectual  and  moral  cause  of  reaction. 
The  herd-mind  which  years  of  national  peril  and  of 
conflict  has  evoked  may  easily  be  induced  to  commit 
itself  to  after-war  policies  fatal  to  personal  liberty, 
to  peace  and  to  democracy.  To  maintain  the  fears 
and  fervours  of  this  herd-mind  and  to  turn  them  into 
grist  for  the  capitalist-bureaucratic-military  mill  is 
the  avowed  intention  of  the  spokesmen  of  reaction. 
School,  Press,  Church,  party,  will  all  be  dragged  into 
the  service,  and  the  money  of  plutocratic  donors  will 
furnish  the  supplementary  funds  and  evoke  the 
desired  intellectual  response. 

I  am  not  here  writing  a  general  treatise  upon 
education,  but  discussing  it  in  its  special  bearing  upon 
the  struggle  for  democracy  in  the  immediate  future. 
We  approached  the  subject  from  a  recognition  of  the 


190         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

need  for  the  democratization  of  the  administrative 
services,  recognizing  that  so  long  as  these  posts  were 
left  as  a  preserve  of  the  well-to-do  classes,  popular 
government  was  not  attainable.  Equality  of  educa- 
tional opportunities  is  one  key  to  this  position.  But 
another  is  reform  of  educational  methods  and  values. 
Here  are  two  dangers,  two  diverse  and  opposing  plans 
by  which  reactionism  has  striven  to  defend  itself. 
One  is  the  retention  of  obsolete  mediaeval  curricula, 
the  artificial  culture  of  a  leisured  master-class, 
exhibiting  its  unearned  wealth  in  ostentatiously 
useless  and  decorative  "  accomplishments."  If  a 
small  minority  of  clever  working  class  boys  can 
by  judicious  selection  be  brought  into  this  atmo- 
sphere of  higher  education,  such  an  opening  of 
opportunity  will  be  far  from  harmful  to  the 
oligarchy.  It  will  draw  from  the  service  of  the 
people  the  picked  brains  of  their  sons  and  fit  them 
for  the  work  of  helping  to  manage  the  people. 
This  has  been  the  method  hitherto  found  satis- 
factory. Certain  concessions  to  modernism  have 
been  made  in  subjects  and  methods  of  teaching,  but 
the  social  and  intellectual  atmosphere  of  higher 
education  in  all  its  stages  has  been  kept  immune 
from  dangerous  influences.  The  new  pressure  for 
popular  opportunities  can,  however,  be  rendered 
innocuous  in  another  way.  Instead  of  directing  the 
latent  intellectualism  of  the  workers  into  enervating 
paths  of  class  culture,  it  is  possible  to  press  it  into 
utilitarian  moulds,  by  overstressing  the  importance 
of  the  applied  sciences  and  purely  technical  accom- 
plishments to  the  detriment  of  any  broad  personal 
culture.     This  seems  to  be  a  doubly  advantageous 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  STATE        191 

defence  of  capitalism.  For  while,  on  the  one  hand, 
it  diverts  the  people's  intelligence  from  the  sorts  of 
knowledge  that  yield  political  power,  on  the  other,  it 
harnesses  their  brains,  as  well  as  their  muscles,  to  the 
chariot  of  profiteering  industry. 

Democracy  must,  therefore,  prepare  for  two  great 
struggles  in  the  field  of  education;  one  against  the 
attempt  to  keep  down  to  a  low  level  the  national 
expenditure  on  human  culture,  while  making  due 
provision  for  scientific  and  technical  instruction  of  a 
directly  utilitarian  order ;  the  other  against  the 
degradation  of  such  human  culture  as  is  provided 
by  the  intrusion  of  sedatives  and  stimuli  devised  for 
interested  purposes  of  "  defence." 


CHAPTER   V 

THE   CLOSE   STATE    VERSUS  INTER- 
NATIONALISM 

This  great  struggle  between  the  forces  of  democracy 
and   those   of  the   capitalist   oligarchy  will   not   be 
permitted  to  appear  so  definite  in  its  outlines  as  it  is 
here  presented.     For,  if  the  people  could  really  get 
to  feel  and  understand  how  much  is  at  stake,  such 
feeling  and  understanding  would  vastly  strengthen 
that  subtle  and  imponderable  element,  the  conscious 
will  to  victory.     An  accurate  instinct  of  class  self- 
defence  will,  therefore,  lead  the  reactionists  to  do  all 
that  is  possible  to  obscure  the  issue,  and  in  particular 
to  pretend  (or  even  to  believe)   that  they  are  not 
fighting  against  democracy  or  for  the  defence  of  class 
power  and  privilege.     Their  most  conscious  tactics 
have  been  long  foreshadowed  under  the  loose  title 
of  Tory  Democracy.     These  tactics  will  be  directed 
-to  two  main  ends.     The  first  is  to  confine  the  political 
and  economic  movements  of  labour  within  the  limits 
of  nationality,  expelling  the  elements  of  internation- 
alism.    The  second  is  to  conserve  their  own  political 
and  economic  supremacy  within  the  nation  by  every 
sort   of   concession,   economic,   social   and   political, 
consistent  with  the  maintenance  of  that  supremacy. 
Such  is  the  "  national "  policy  at  the  head  of  which 
in  this  country  Mr.  Lloyd  George  (or  his  successor) 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     193 

will  place  himself.  It  will  offer  a  whole  world  of 
socialistic  and  democratic  reforms,  on  condition  that 
the  people  fall  down  and  worship  it.  I  have  already 
indicated  its  nature  under  the  description  of  Prussian- 
Australianism.  It  will  be  replete  with  boons  and 
benefits  to  the  working-classes,  guaranteed  standard 
wages,  limited  hours  of  labour,  provision  against 
unemployment,  better  housing,  free  medical  service, 
access  to  the  land,  facilities  for  co-operative  enterprise 
in  agriculture  and  industry,  and  "  a  voice  "  in  the 
control  of  the  workshops  and  the  trade  on  matters 
affecting  labour,  combined  with  "  scientific  manage- 
ment "  under  various  designations.  There  will  be 
adult  suffrage  for  men  and  women,  minority  represen- 
tation, possibly  a  referendum.  A  castrated  Labour 
Government  may  even  seem  to  be  a  possibility  of  the 
near  future. 

Only  one  general  condition  will  be  appended,  that 
of  close  nationalism,  the  organized  national  or  imperial 
State,  self-sufficing  in  all  the  essentials  of  government, 
economics  and  defence.  Internationalism  in  the 
shape  of  Mr.  Wilson's  and  Lord  Grey's  League  of 
Nations  is  not,  we  shall  be  told,  a  presently  practicable 
idea  :  the  stern  facts  of  life  in  a  dangerous  world 
forbid  a  nation  or  an  empire  like  our  own  to  place 
its  destiny  outside  the  limits  of  its  own  control. 
Such  international  alliances  as  it  may  cultivate  must, 
therefore,  be  confined  to  chosen  friends  and  must  in 
no  case  involve  anything  in  the  nature  of  international 
government.  Our  empire  must  be  the  largest  area 
of  organization  :  to  the  development  of  its  resources 
and  the  cultivation  of  its  sentiment  of  unity  all  con- 
siderations of  foreign  relations  must  be  subordinated. 

13 


194         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

This  nation  and  this  empire  must  be  strengthened 
by  special  measures  of  a  constructive  and  corporate 
kind.  There  must  be  concerted  action  for  imperial 
defence,  involving  the  maintenance  of  conscription 
and  of  a  great  standardized  military  and  naval  power. 
The  necessity  of  this  defence,  derived  from  the  refusal 
of  internationalism,  will  itself  involve  the  formation 
of  a  close  imperial  federal  State,  in  which  the  world- 
politics,  hitherto  controlled  by  a  British  Foreign 
Office,  will  be  delegated  to  a  representative  Imperial 
Cabinet  or  Council,  in  which  the  self-governing 
Dominions  will  be  called  in  to  guarantee  the  orderly 
subjection  and  the  profitable  exploitation  of  the  sub- 
ject peoples  in  India,  our  Crown  Colonies,  and  our 
Protectorates.1  Protectionism,  primarily,  as  we  saw, 
a  special  brand  of  capitalist  plundering,  will  be 
presented  as  a  necessary  measure  of  defence,  a 
policy  of  imperial  and  national  organization.  We 
must  have  all  our  "  key  "  industries  under  our  own 
flag.  Public  finance  as  well  as  commerce  must  be 
adapted  (upon  German  lines)  to  this  scientific 
exploration  and  exploitation  of  the  Empire.  The 
necessity  of  having  ample  supplies  of  all  important 
foods  and  materials  within  our  political  area  of  control 
will  impel  us  to  new  measures  of  imperial  expansion, 
in  competition  with  rival  empires,  for  rich  supplies 
of  copper,  iron,  rubber,  oil,  cotton,  nitrates,  discovered 
in  unappropriated  backward  countries. 

Now,  it  is  idle  to  deny  that  such  a  scheme  has 

1  The  Empire  Resources  Development  Committee,  upon  which 
sit  five  members  of  the  Government,  has  an  interesting  scheme 
for  "  imperializing "  the  land  of  our  tropical  dependencies  and 
forcing  native  labour  to  grind  dividends  for  private  companies 
and  revenue  for  the  State. 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     195 

powerful  appeals  to  the  more  innocent  and  unin- 
structed  workers  in  this  country,  as  in  France  and 
Germany.  In  all  countries  some  Labour  leaders  can 
be  won  over  to  adopt  it  as  the  largest,  safest  and  most 
immediate  measure  of  Socialism  and  democracy  that 
is  available,  and  a  large  support  will  be  given  by  a 
rank  and  file  whose  mind  is  still  inflamed  by  the 
passions  of  the  war.  The  atmosphere  of  envy, 
hatred,  malice  and  suspicion  will  be  favourable  for 
fastening  a  separatist  system  upon  our  politics  and 
trade,  and  for  "  keeping  ourselves  to  ourselves  "  by 
setting  up  barriers  against  "  the  foreigner,"  visualized 
primarily  as  the  Hun,  but  easily  extended  to  include 
all  nations  who  did  not  fight  upon  our  side  in  the 
great  war.  Hitherto,  we  shall  be  told,  the  nations  of 
the  Western  world,  and  Britain  especially,  have  been 
drifting  rapidly  towards  an  economic  internationalism, 
the  peril  of  which  has  been  exposed  by  the  war. 
Safety,  progress  and  social  democracy  can  only  be 
realized  within  the  limits  of  the  national  or  imperial 
State,  for  only  within  these  limits  can  the  political 
organization  which  Socialism  requires  be  made  avail- 
able. A  nation,  to  be  strong  and  safe,  must  rely 
upon  its  own  economic  and  human  resources.  The 
working-class  "  international  "  is  little  more  than  a 
vague  humanitarian  sentiment.  It  is  and  will  remain 
devoid  of  political  or  economic  reality.  Of  the  two 
opposing  forces,  capitalism  and  Socialism,  it  is  the 
former,  not  the  latter,  which  is  in  its  proclivities 
international.  French  logic  poses  the  issue  in  the 
following  sharp  antithesis  : — 

Capitalism  needs  peace  in  order  to  live  and  grow  :  it  is 
international  in  essence  and  in  organization.     Socialism, 


196         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

upon  the  other  hand,  though  it  may  hate  war,  has  nothing 
that  is  inconsistent  with  the  narrowest  nationalism.  It  is 
a  pure  accident  that  it  has  hitherto  affected,  especially  in 
France,  a  humanitarian  and  internationalist  form.  It  is 
national  Socialism  that  must  rank  as  the  least  chimerical 
and  the  most  logical  of  socialisms.  For  Socialism  can  only 
be  realized  theoretically  in  a  closed  State,  shut  within 
stiff  barriers,  whose  economic  equilibrium  is  not  liable 
constantly  to  be  upset  by  external  occurrences.1 

The  practical  failure  of  the  international  factor  of 
Socialism  in  August  1914  will  be  taken  as  testimony 
to  its  merely  sentimental  character.  Working-class 
socialists  who  mean  business  must  therefore  build 
upon  the  broadest  practical  foundation  open  to  them, 
their  national  organization.  They  will  be  told, 
"  You  have  your  national  resources  under  your  own 
control,  if  you  organize  your  political  and  economic 
power.  The  war  has  achieved  a  large  measure  of 
State  Socialism  which  you  have  only  to  retain  and 
to  administer  for  working-class  purposes.  The  British 
self-governing  Dominions  have  already  committed 
themselves  to  this  path  of  advance.  March  with 
them  in  working  out  an  imperial  social  democracy, 
without  waiting  for  the  more  backward  nations  to 
achieve  the  slow  and  difficult  task  of  achieving  a 
level  of  political  liberty  which  will  make  the  inter- 
national union  a  possibility/' 

Such  a  plea  for  close  nationalism,  however,  will 
only  seem  plausible  so  long  as  it  remains  in  the  region 
of  general  phrases.  Can  the  civilization  of  the  world 
henceforth  live  in  separate  national  compartments  ? 

1  Alfred  de  Tardc,  "L'Europe  court-die  a  sa  Ruine  ?"  p.  25. 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     197 

Though  political  internationalism  has  not  gone  very 
far,  economic  internationalism  has.  The  whole 
material  and  moral  basis  of  modern  life  is  laid  in  a 
most  elaborate  network  of  commercial,  physical  and 
personal  communications,  by  which  the  members  of 
all  advanced  States  have  been  brought  into  close  and 
continual  co-operation  for  many  of  the  essential 
services  and  activities.  To  withdraw  from  these 
communications,  or  in  any  way  to  weaken  them, 
would  be  a  signal  damage  to  the  life  even  of  the 
French  people,  who  are  more  self-sufficient  for  the 
essential  services  of  life,  economic  and  moral,  than 
any  other  great  European  nation.  For  Great  Britain 
the  shock  and  injury  of  such  a  reversal  of  her  activities 
would  be  incalculably  great.  The  entire  body  of  our 
economic  system,  on  its  productive  and  consumptive 
sides,  has  been  nourished  upon  the  freest  available 
access  to  all  markets,  all  national  supplies,  all  economic 
opportunities  throughout  the  world.  A  large  and 
growing  proportion  of  our  wealth  has  been  obtained 
by  organizing  and  controlling  the  supply  of  inter- 
national communications,  in  transport,  commerce  and 
finance.  We  cannot  achieve  the  close  imperialism 
or  nationalism  to  which  we  are  invited  without  aban- 
doning these  great  and  profitable  functions  of  inter- 
nationalism. The  closer  economic  unity  of  the 
Empire  could  furnish  no  compensation  for  such  a 
surrender  of  our  wider  economic  role.  That  Empire 
cannot  be  converted  into  a  "  close  "  economic  system 
capable  of  furnishing  all  the  requirements  of  its 
inhabitants  from  its  own  areas,  vast  and  varied  though 
they  are.  A  single  test-fact  will  suffice  to  prick  any 
such    pretence.     Four-fifths    of    our    wheat    supply 


198         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

comes  from  overseas*  Now,  in  a  year  of  bad  harvest, 
1908,  our  Empire  only  furnished  24  per  cent,  (less 
than  one  quarter)  of  our  importation  of  this  necessity 
of  life.  Almost  the  whole  supply  of  some  of  the 
necessary  materials  for  our  staple  manufactures, 
such  as  cotton,  rubber,  petroleum,  nitrates  and 
potash,  are  drawn,  and  must  for  a  long  time  be  drawn, 
from  countries  outside  our  Empire.  Any  experiment 
in  a  close  imperial  or  national  system,  supported  by 
Protection,  must  grievously  impair  our  access  to 
these  foreign  sources  of  supply  which  have  hitherto 
poured  into  our  open  ports.  Though  Free  Trade  has 
historically  been  associated  with  a  capitalist  economy, 
no  British  State,  however  socialistic  in  its  inner 
structure,  could  afford  to  tamper  with  the  free  impor- 
tation of  foreign  goods  or  to  confine  within  artificial 
barriers  the  operation  of  British  shipping  and  finance. 
The  first  objection,  therefore,  to  close  nationalism 
or  imperialism,  is  that  it  is  unsafe  and  impracticable 
from  the  economic  standpoint.  Another  objection, 
equally  vital,  is  that  such  a  "  Socialism  "  as  it  promises 
could  not  be  democratic.  It  is,  in  fact,  part  of  a 
design  to  substitute  a  new  sort  of  capitalism,  under  the 
name  of  State  Socialism,  for  the  competing  capitalism 
which  had  reached  its  zenith  and  was  doomed  to 
pass  away.  Under  this  State  Socialism  the  ruling 
and  possessing  classes  would  retain  their  power,  their 
property,  and  their  profitable  control  of  the  workers. 
Great  landlords  like  Lord  Derby,  mining  and  rail 
magnates  like  Lord  Rhondda,  prosperous  capitalists 
in  grocery  or  newspapers,  like  Lord  Devonport  and 
Lord  Northcliffe,  would  continue  in  peace,  as  in  war, 
to  organize  the  national  resources  in  the  name  of  a 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     199 

State  which  had  thrown  off  all  real  control  of  Parlia- 
ment and  the  electorate,  and  consisted  of  a  con- 
federacy of  these  big  business  men  with  their  perman- 
ent staffs  of  Civil  servants  and  their  changing  staffs 
of  politicians  to  do  the  necessary  legislative  business 
in  conformity  with  the  empty  usages  of  representative 
government.  This  new  capitalism  would  be  stronger 
and  more  profitable  than  the  old.  For  the  trades  it 
ruled  would  take  two  shapes.  Some  would  be  State 
monopolies,  in  which  high  wages  of  management 
would  form  the  smallest  part  of  the  spoils,  the  great 
"  profiteering "  opportunities  being  found  in  the 
subsidiary  trades  contracting  for  the  State  mono- 
polies. The  real  strongholds  of  profiteering  would 
be  found  in  the  cartels  and  syndicates  which,  in  close 
imitation  of  Germany,  would  soon  emerge  as  the 
results  of  a  union  of  State  control  and  Protectionism, 
and  in  the  restoration  of  a  British  Junker  Squiredom 
flourishing  upon  the  high  rents  of  a  subsidized  and 
protected  agriculture.  The  aim  would  be  to  secure 
such  State  control  as  is  consistent  with  the  largest 
liberty  and  opportunity  of  private  profiteering.  If 
wasteful  competition  within  each  primary  industry 
can  be  repressed  and  labour  can  be  coerced,  cajoled 
or  bribed  into  a  policy  of  better  discipline  and  higher 
productivity,  a  solid  foundation  for  this  new  capitalism 
is  laid.  It  will  be  said  that  this  presumes  overmuch 
upon  the  submissiveness  of  labour  and  its  blindness 
to  the  meaning  of  the  new  bondage.  But  here  comes 
in  the  contribution  of  other  reactionary  forces.  The 
experiment  in  war-policy  is  itself  a  rough  draft  of 
what  the  new  capitalism  requires.  The  problem  is 
how  to  extend  and  consolidate  this  system  as  a  per- 


200        DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

manent  peace-policy.     In  order  to  succeed  in  this 
it  would  seem  necessary  to  retain,  as  far  as  possible, 
the  motives  and  stimuli  so  effectively  applied  for 
the  duration  of  the  war.     This  means  the  retention 
of  the  general  feeling  that  we  are  living  in  a  dangerous 
world  and  that  we  are  liable  at  any  time  to  be  sub- 
jected to  the  perils  of  another  war.     If  this  war  were 
really  made  "  the  war  to  end  war,"  and  were  followed 
by  an  era  of  security,  general  disarmament  and  the 
development  of  a  solid  international  order,  the  new 
capitalist  world  would  be  unattainable.     The  attempt 
is,   therefore,   certain  to  be  made   (not  with  clear, 
conscious  intention,  but  by  the  drift  of  selfish  interests 
which  we  have  seen  to  be  the  ordinary  modus  operandi) , 
to  keep  this  country  and  the  Western  world  in  a 
sufficiently  unsettled  state  to  reconcile  the  workers 
to  the   necessary  subjugation  and  restraints.     This 
is  the  chief  significance  of  the  Paris  Economic  Confer- 
ence, its  economic  supports  for  the  present  Alliance 
after  peace  is  concluded,  its  boycott  of  the  Central 
Powers    and    all    the    accompanying   Protectionism. 
The  effort,  and  the  implicit  purpose,  is  to  stop  the 
resumption  of  free  international  commerce,  to  set  up 
lasting  economic  conflicts  in  Europe,  and  so  to  render 
impossible  a  League  of  Nations.     This  policy  would 
ensure   a   dangerous   world.     It   would   justify    the 
maintenance    of    military    conscription    and    great 
competing  armaments,  thus  providing  for  the  disci- 
pline of  the  working  classes  and  the  forcible  repression 
of  any  proletarian  movement,  economic  or  political, 
which  threatened  the  public  order.     While  playing 
directly    into    the    hands    of    the    great    armament 
businesses  it  would  also  furnish  the  requisite  stimuli 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     20I 

and  instruments  for  the  further  pursuit  of  an  imperial 
aggrandisement  which  in  its  turn  would  evoke  the 
competition  of  other  aspiring  empires  and  so  once 
more  react  against  security  and  internationalism. 
While,  therefore,  a  closed  State,  national  or  imperial, 
might  be  socialistic  in  economic  structure,  it  could 
not  be  democratic  in  government.  For  it  is  not  only 
actual  war  that  is  seen  to  be  incompatible  with 
democracy.  Potential  war  is  seen  to  be  likewise 
incompatible.  Now  the  nationalism,  imperialism, 
militarism,  Protectionism  of  a  "  closed  State  "  are 
potential  war.  They  are  a  reversion  to  a  state  of 
things  which,  regarded  from  the  international  and 
human  standpoint,  is  literally  anarchy.  Such  indus- 
trial harmony,  or  Socialism,  as  might  conceivably 
exist  inside  this  closed  State  must  be  subordinated 
to  considerations  of  national  defence.  Its  primary 
function  must  be  to  contribute  the  maximum  economic 
strength  for  the  emergency  of  war.  Its  industry, 
transport,  commerce  and  finance  would  be  organized 
with  this  end  consciously  in  view.  Only  such  "  social 
reforms  "  as  contribute  to  this  end  could  be  adopted. 
Rural  development  would  aim  exclusively  at  food 
supplies  for  a  besieged  country  and  a  large  sturdy 
population  for  cannon-food.  Railways  and  roads 
would  be  primarily  strategic.  Mining,  engineering, 
shipbuilding,  chemical,  and  other  industries  of  direct 
military  or  naval  value  would  be  controlled,  subsi- 
dized and  otherwise  artificially  stimulated,  such 
favourable  terms  of  employment  being  accorded  as 
would  maintain  an  adequate  supply  of  highly  pro- 
ductive labour.  Other  occupations  would  be  graded 
as  of  greater  or  less  national  importance  according  to 


202         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

their  presumptive  utility,  material  or  financial,  for 
purposes  of  war.  Commerce  would,  so  far  as  feasible, 
be  confined  for  all  essentials  to  the  limits  of  the 
nation  or  the  empire,  for  non-essentials  to  a  restricted 
circle  of  allied  or  friendly  Powers.  Shipping  would 
be  directed  by  State-owned,  controlled  or  subsidized 
lines,  along  imperial  and  other  prescribed  routes. 
The  intellectual  and  spiritual  life  of  the  closed  State 
would  be  regulated  by  an  educational  policy,  a  Press 
and  art  censorship,  a  religious  and  a  recreational 
system,  prescribed  by  political  power  and  enforced 
by  all  the  modes  of  authority  and  influence  which  we 
have  already  explored.  Not  only  the  material  life  of 
the  people  but  its  soul  would  thus  be  nationalized 
and  militarized  under  the  closed  State.  Democracy 
could  have  no  place  in  such  a  State.  In  industry,  as 
in  politics,  the  Government,  dominated  in  all  matters 
of  importance  by  considerations,  not  of  general 
human  welfare,  but  of  national  defence  qualified  by 
business  pulls,  must  impose  the  arbitrary  will  of 
political  and  business  rulers  and  their  paid  experts 
upon  the  people.  Though  the  forms  of  popular 
self-government  might  survive  and  even  be  extended, 
not  merely  in  the  field  of  politics  but  of  industry, 
the  dominant  purpose  of  the  closed  State  would 
quench  the  spirit  of  popular  control  wherever  it 
asserted  itself.  For  the  closed  State  must  remain  a 
military  State,  and  all  the  sacrifices  which  the  people 
have  made  in  war  would  be  riveted  upon  them  in 
the  intervals  of  rest  from  war  entitled  peace. 

This  diagnosis  will  seem  to  some  an  exaggeration. 
Possibly  it  is.  For  it  presents  the  logic  of  the  closed 
State,  working  more  clearly  and  cleanly  than  would 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM    203 

be  the  case  in  Great  Britain.  The  evolution  of  this 
new  national  order  would  emerge  blurred  and  crossed 
by  conflicting  tendencies.  The  capitalistic  forces, 
as  we  know,  would  be  themselves  divided.  Those 
with  international  associations  would  struggle  against 
the  rigid  nationalization  of  the  new  order,  and  might 
make  common  cause  with  the  more  enlightened 
sections  of  labour.  This  division  of  capitalist  forces 
has  served  in  recent  years  to  retard  the  evolution  of 
the  reactionary  movement  in  this  country,  not  only 
towards  Protectionism  but  towards  militarism,  bureau- 
cracy and  the  general  system  of  the  close  State. 
After  the  war,  strong  elements  of  this  opposition  may 
still  survive  and  by  means  of  ad  hoc  co-operation 
with  the  socialist  workers  may  put  heavy  obstacles 
in  the  path  of  the  constructive  policy  of  reaction. 
In  thus  acting,  their  particular  trade  interests  will 
be  fortified  by  a  recognition  that  the  costs  of  the 
expensive  militarist-Protectionist  policy  must  chiefly 
fall  on  them.  Trades  which  possess  a  profitable  pull 
upon  the  State,  in  tariffs,  subsidies  and  public  con- 
tracts, may  meet  the  high  income  and  property  taxes 
that  must  be  imposed  with  a  smiling  face,  for  they 
get  more  than  they  give.  But  the  capitalists  whose 
trades  either  are  dependent  largely  upon  free  inter- 
national trade  and  finance,  or  else  are  so  distinctively 
domestic  that  Protection  is  of  no  use  to  them,  will 
have  to  meet  the  high  taxation  with  no  compensating 
advantages.  When  they  come  to  realize  this  situation 
and  to  understand  that  by  no  fiscal  devices  can  they 
shift  on  to  the  workers  the  bulk  of  the  new  tax- 
burden,  many  of  those  capitalists  will  be  likely  to 
come  over  to  a  pacifist  internationalist  frame  of  mind. 


204         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

This  probable  division  in  the  business  world  may 
prove  of  critical  importance  in  weakening  the  soli- 
darity of  capitalism. 

But  it  remains  none  the  less  true  that  the  survival 
of  democracy  must  depend  in  the  long  run  upon  a 
new,  determined  and  intelligent  rally  of  the  forces  of 
labour  to  the  cause  of  internationalism.  For  the 
full  effort  of  the  Unholy  Alliance  will  be  directed  to 
enlist  the  sympathy  and  interests  of  labour  for  this 
project  of  a  close  State.  The  emotional  atmosphere 
will  be  favourable.  National  and  imperial  self- 
reliance  will  make  a  popular  appeal.  The  public 
guarantees  of  high  money-wages  and  other  good 
conditions  will  be  represented  as  contingent  upon  a 
"  national  economy  **  which  shall  exclude  cheap 
foreign  labour  and  its  produce  from  our  shores.  The 
inevitable  costs  of  this  "  economy,"  viz.  reduced 
income,  precarious  supplies  of  foreign  foods  and 
materials,  expensive  armaments,  recurring  war-peril, 
conscription,  capitalist  bureaucracy,  will  be  concealed 
as  far  as  possible.  Carefully  selected  drafts  of  labour 
men  will  from  time  to  time  be  taken  over  into  the 
bureaucracy,  a  process  which  will  be  represented  as 
an  adequate  response  to  the  demand  for  a  democratic 
organization  of  industry.  In  fact,  it  will  be  designed 
to  serve,  and  will  serve,  as  an  inoculation  against 
what  officialism  regards  as  the  disease  of  democracy. 

The  peril  of  this  endeavour  to  debauch  the  working- 
class  movement  cannot  be  met  by  a  mere  expo- 
sure of  the  capitalistic-bureaucratic-militarist  policy. 
The  mere  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the  ruling  and 
possessing  castes  are  playing  their  old  game  of  substi- 
tuting a  vertical  national  cleavage  for  a  lateral  class 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     205 

cleavage  will  not  furnish  an  adequate  resistance. 
The  so-called  international  solidarity  of  labour  is 
too  distinctively  sentimental  a  force,  while  the  idea 
of  an  international  class  war  conducted  on  the  indus- 
trial field  by  a  general  strike  or  any  other  mode  of 
simultaneous  revolt  against  capitalism  is  almost  as 
impracticable  as  the  kindred  proposal  to  stop  a 
war  by  a  simultaneous  refusal  of  the  workers  to 
respond  to  the  call  to  arms.  I  do  not  undervalue 
the  importance  of  getting  the  workers,  who  are  also 
the  peoples  of  the  different  countries,  to  confer,  to 
unite  and  to  take  concerted  action  where  they  can. 
But  the  identity  of  interest  between  the  working 
classes  of  the  different  nations  in  "  the  class  struggle  " 
does  not  in  itself  yet  afford  the  requisite  community 
of  thought  and  feeling  for  powerful  international 
co-operation.  It  is  not  supported  by  a  sufficient 
body  of  close  personal  intercourse  and  the  sort  of 
understanding  which  can  come  in  no  other  way.  It 
is  very  difficult  for  workers,  whose  languages  and 
ways  of  living  are  so  different  and  whose  opportunities 
of  meeting  one  another  are  so  narrowly  restricted,  to 
fuse  directly  in  any  powerful  international  movement 
upon  a  mere  basis  of  community  of  occupation. 
Education  and  growing  intercourse  between  the 
active  working-class  leaders  of  the  respective  nations 
may  in  time  do  much.  But  at  present  it  is  too 
precarious  a  bond  for  the  internationalism  that  is 
so  urgently  required.  For  the  immediate  enemy,  as 
we  see,  will  be  the  close  State.  And  working-class 
internationalism  has  continually  oscillated  between 
the  policy  of  ignoring  the  State,  while  trying  to  build 
up  an  economic  internationalism  outside  it,  and  the 


206         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

policy  of  using  the  State  for  definitely  economic 
ends.  Even  Socialism,  though  international  in  theory, 
has  seldom  set  itself  to  any  realization  of  the  necessity 
of  a  concerted  movement  towards  a  mastery  of  the 
national  State  by  the  workers  of  the  respective 
nations,  with  the  object  of  building  up  an  inter- 
national democracy.  Yet  this  is  precisely  the  work 
that  must  be  done,  if  democracy  is  to  survive.  Any 
endeavour  to  build  up  industrial  democracy  either 
on  a  national  or  an  international  basis  merely  or 
mainly  by  means  of  working-class  organization  outside 
State  machinery  must  fail.  Industrial  and  political 
democracy  stand  or  fall  together,  by  an  inseparable 
fate.  If  the  workers  within  each  nation  cannot 
capture  their  State  and  through  their  State  the 
new  international  political  arrangement,  League  of 
Nations  or  whatever  it  be  called,  they  will  be  helpless 
in  the  hands  of  their  rulers  and  their  capitalists. 
Trade-unionism,  syndicalism,  or  gild  Socialism, 
therefore,  though  containing  contributions  of  inestim- 
able value  towards  democracy,  cannot  provide  a 
short  cut  or  dispense  with  the  necessity  of  seizing, 
reforming  and  democratizing  the  machinery  of 
existing  States  and  inter-State  relations. 

For  all  the  actual  transactions  which  imperil  peace 
and  so  sustain  militarism  and  bureaucracy  within 
each  country  will  continue  to  be  governmental,  and, 
unless  the  peoples  can  control  their  governments, 
that  control  will  continue  to  be  exercised  by  the 
combination  of  business  and  political  forces  perman- 
ently hostile  to  peace  and  internationalism. 

The  temptation  to  shun  the  State  instead  of  master- 
ing it  has  come  up  recently  in  a  particularly  dangerous 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     207 

shape,  that  of  a  refusal  to  support  the  new  proposal 
for  founding  inter-State  relations  upon  a  League  of 
Nations,  because  the  Governments  which  would 
form  and  operate  this  League  would  not  at  first  be 
democratic  in  their  constitution.  How  is  it  possible, 
we  are  asked,  that  you  can  entrust  safely  the  begin- 
nings of  such  an  international  Government  to  the  very 
class  of  men  in  the  several  countries  whose  aggressive 
and  suspicious  temper,  class  interests,  obsolete  and 
incompetent  statecraft,  have  got  the  world  into  its 
present  desperate  plight  ?  The  answer  is  that, 
though  no  high  measure  of  security  may  be  attained 
under  such  conditions,  the  insecurity  of  the  only 
present  alternative,  viz.  a  reversion  to  the  pre-war 
situation  of  two  opposing  groups  under  the  control 
of  these  same  men,  is  far  more  formidable.  We 
cannot  suppose  that  the  business  of  the  world  can  be 
conducted  without  any  formal  and  collective  arrange- 
ments between  the  constituent  nations.  Many  of 
those  arrangements  must  be  conducted  by  the 
Governments  of  those  nations.  It  is  surely  safer 
that  the  Governments  which  will  conduct  these 
arrangements  shall  be  on  formally  amicable  terms 
than  arrayed  in  hostile  groups  or  alliances.  Just 
as  the  vices  and  defects  of  a  class  Government  within 
a  nation  rightly  constitute  a  challenge  and  an  incen- 
tive to  popular  control,  so  likewise  with  the  inter- 
national Government.  An  ill-constructed  State  is 
generally  better  than  anarchy.  Now,  the  only 
present  alternative  to  a  League  of  Nations,  however 
unsatisfactory  in  its  personal  control,  is  a  return  to 
international  anarchy.  Democratic  control  of  the 
Society  of  Nations,  as  of  the  several  nations,  is  the 


208         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

only  full  security  for  peace  and  progress,  but  that  is 
no  ground  for  refusal  to  support  the  best  beginnings 
of  that  international  society  which,  under  the  exist- 
ing circumstances,  are  attainable.  It  is  not  true  that 
the  formation  of  a  League  of  Nations,  binding  them- 
selves to  enforce  by  common  action  the  fulfilment  of 
their  treaty  obligations,  places  a  new  weapon  in  the 
hands  of  the  ruling  classes  and  constitutes  a  new 
danger  to  the  workers.  If  such  a  League,  however 
undemocratically  controlled,  is  effective  in  its  main 
object,  it  reduces  the  aggregate  of  military  and  naval 
force  in  the  world  and  lessens  the  likelihood  of  its 
use.  The  danger  of  a  class  Government  within  a 
nation  using  its  armed  forces  to  repress  strikes  or 
other  popular  movements  will  be  diminished  propor- 
tionately with  the  reduction  of  national  armaments 
which  will  be  the  result  and  measure  of  the  success 
of  the  League.  The  notion  of  the  League  turning 
into  a  new  Holy  Alliance  of  the  capitalist  bureau- 
cracy within  each  State  for  the  concerted  repression 
of  all  democratic  movements  can  hardly  be  a  serious 
apprehension  in  face  of  the  divergencies  of  interest 
between  the  ruling  groups  within  the  several  States. 
But  even  if  such  a  danger  were  latent  in  the  formation 
of  an  international  Government,  it  would  be  better 
for  democracy  to  confront  it,  than  to  lapse  into  the 
pre-war  situation  definitely  worsened  by  the  new 
powers  wielded  by  reaction  within  each  State. 

The  sound  policy  for  each  people  is  to  accept  and 
welcome  the  formation  of  a  League  of  Nations, 
however  imperfect  in  representation,  as  an  instrument 
for  the  operation  of  the  larger  international  will  so 
soon  as  that  will  becomes  real   enough   to   master 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     209 

the  instrument.  There  is,  however,  no  reason  why  the 
more  advanced  nations  should  acquiesce  even  at  the 
outset  in  an  undemocratic  constitution  of  a  League  of 
Nations.  It  is  certainly  of  grave  importance  that 
the  traditions  of  the  bad  statecraft  of  the  past 
should  be  scrapped  and  that  the  effective  relations 
between  States  in  the  future  should  be  conducted 
by  men  and  methods  reflecting  the  national  interests 
and  common  welfare  of  the  peoples  involved.  This 
can  only  be  compassed  by  provisions  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  Courts,  Councils,  or  other  international 
bodies,  formed  to  secure  the  peace  and  promote  the 
common  good  of  nations,  for  the  appointment  of 
persons  genuinely  representative,  in  knowledge, 
capacity  and  interests,  of  the  popular  life  of  the 
several  countries.  Whether  such  appointments  should 
be  made  directly,  by  popular  representation  among 
the  several  peoples,  or  by  election  of  their  parliaments, 
is  not  of  vital  importance.  For  unless  the  people  are 
vigorous  and  intelligent  enough  to  secure  the  mastery 
of  their  own  national  State,  they  cannot  hope  to 
control  their  international  representatives  upon  the 
League  of  Nations,  and  the  importance  of  the  latter 
achievement  ought  to  be  an  additional  incentive  to 
the  former.  It  is  the  same  current  of  democratic 
energy  that  has  to  flow  into  and  nourish  the  organs 
of  national  and  international  government.  To  refuse 
the  second  of  these  related  tasks,  or  to  attempt  to 
substitute  for  it  some  distinctively  non-political  form 
of  internationalism,  would  be  a  fatal  error  that  would 
play  into  the  hands  of  the  reactionists  by  enabling 
the  enemies  of  democracy  to  establish  the  close 
militarist  protected  State  and  to  cajole  or  coerce  the 

14 


210         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

people  into  defending  it  as  the  only  tolerable  method 
of  security  in  a  world  which  they  will  purposely  keep 
dangerous  in  order  that  their  class  policy  may  continu- 
ally impose  itself  on  popular  credulity. 

Such  is  the  issue  as  I  see  it  emerging  from  the  fog 
of  war.  The  forces  of  reaction  will  be  more  closely 
consolidated  than  before,  more  conscious  of  their 
community  of  interest  and  of  the  part  which  they 
respectively  can  play  in  the  maintenance  of  "  social 
order/'  They  will  have  had  recent  and  striking 
testimony  to  the  submissive  and  uncritical  character 
of  the  people,  and  of  their  own  ability  to  impose 
their  arbitrary  will  upon  the  conduct  of  affairs  in 
which  the  popular  temper  was  supposed  to  be  most 
sensitive.  They  will  have  at  their  disposal  a  large 
number  of  new  legal  instruments  of  coercion  and  the 
habits  of  obeying  them  derived  from  several  years  of 
use.  The  popular  mind  will  have  been  saturated 
with  sentiments  and  ideas  favourable  to^i  constructive 
policy  of  national  defence,  Imperialism,  Protectionism 
and  bureaucratic  Socialism  making  for  a  close  State 
under  class  control  with  the  empty  forms  of  represen- 
tative government.  All  the  educative  and  suggestive 
institutions,  Church,  schools  and  universities,  Press, 
places  of  amusement,  will  be  poisoned  with  false 
patriotism  and  class  domination  masquerading  as 
national  unity. 

On  the  other  hand,  a  powerful  fund  of  genuine 
democratic  feeling  will  be  liberated  with  the  peace. 
The  temper  of  the  peoples,  released  from  the  tension 
of  war,  will  be  irritable  and  suspicious,  and  this 
irritability  and  suspicion,  copiously  fed  by  stories  of 


CLOSE  STATE   V.   INTERNATIONALISM     211 

governmental  incompetence  and  capitalistic  greed 
in  the  conduct  of  the  war,  and  sharpened  by  personal 
sacrifices  and  privations,  will  be  dangerous  for 
governments.  The  contrast  between  the  liberties 
for  which  they  were  fighting  and  the  new  restraints 
to  which  they  are  subjected  will  be  disconcerting 
and  instructive.  Every  trade  and  every  locality 
will  have  its  special  difficulties  and  grievances. 
Economic  and  financial  troubles  will  everywhere 
break  up  the  artificial  national  unity  of  war-time, 
and  the  grave  political  cleavages  that  must  display 
themselves  when  the  issues  of  taxation,  permanent 
conscription,  State  ownership  of  industries,  imperial 
federation  and  international  relations  open  out,  will, 
by  breaking  the  old  moulds  of  party,  set  free  large 
volumes  of  political  energy  for  new  experiments  in 
political  and  economic  reconstruction.  Many  of  the 
old  taboos  of  class  prestige,  sex  distinction,  sanctity 
of  property,  and  settled  modes  of  living  and  of  think- 
ing, will  be  broken  for  large  sections  of  the  population. 
The  returning  armies  will  carry  back  into  their  homes 
and  industries  powerful  reactions  against  militarism 
and  will  not  be  disposed  to  take  lying  down  the 
attempt  of  the  reactionists  to  incorporate  it  as  a  fixed 
institution  in  the  State.  In  every  country  of  Europe 
popular  discontent  will  be  seething  and  suspicions 
against  rulers  gathering.  In  other  words,  all  the 
factors  of  violent  or  pacific  revolution  will  exist  in 
conscious  activity.  The  raw  material  and  energy 
for  a  great  democratic  movement  will  be  at  hand, 
provided  that  thought,  organization  and  direction 
can  make  them  effective.  Hitherto  for  our  working, 
as  indeed  for  our  other  classes,  clear  thinking  has  been 


212         DEMOCRACY  AFTER  THE  WAR 

an  intolerable  burden.  But  there  is  no  congenital 
racial  incapacity  for  thinking,  if  the  emergency  is 
adequate,  and,  for  the  workers  at  any  rate,  it  should 
be  adequate.  For  they  will  be  confronted  by  the 
now  plain  alternative  of  a  firmly  entrenched  class 
supremacy  in  politics,  industry  and  every  other 
social  institution,  and  the  necessity  of  popular 
organization  for  the  control  of  the  government  in 
order  that  they  may  recover  their  lost  liberties  and 
establish  and  extend  the  principles  of  political  and 
social   self-government. 


INDEX 


Absolutism  of  State,  114,  115 
Adam  Smith,  118 
Administration,  power  of,  184-5 
Arbitration,  183 

compulsory,  in 
Armaments — 

British,  44-5 

French,  45 

German,  46 

Italian,  50 
Australia,  labour  in,  152 
Authoritarianism,  22 

Bacon,  quoted,  25 
Belgium,  38 

Cambon,  quoted,  39 
Capital,  use  of,  29 
Capitalism — 

rise  of,  26,  29 

attack  on,  154 
Cecil,  Lord  Hugh,  63  n. 
Chamberlain,  84,  109 
China  loan,  93-8 
Churches  and  Militarism,  123-4 
Churchill,  Mr.  Winston,  65 
Civilization,  mission  of,  37 
Class  struggle,  205 
Clericalism,  124-5 
Conscription — 

industrial,  14 

military,  hi 
Consortium,  Anglo-German,  94 


Creusot,  92 
Crisp  loan,  97 
Cromer,  quoted,  89 
Curragh  camp,  65 

Defence  of  Realm  Act,  13,  15,  66 
Demobilization — 

economy  of,  163 

effects  of,  18 
Democracy — 

and  Reaction,  117 

ineffective,  5 

meaning  of,  158 

Tory,  192 
Derby,  Lord,  198 
Devonport,  Lord,  198 
Dickinson,  Mr.  G.  Lowes,  116 
Don  Pacifico,  90 
Dreyfus,  60 

Economics,  classical,  119-20 
Education — 

fear  of,  55 

higher,  189 

question,  187 

reaction  and,  188-90 
Egypt,  80-90 

and  finance,  83 
Empire — 

closed,  197 

development,  194 
European  Anarchy,  116 


213 


214 


INDEX 


Finance,  the  trail  of,  83 

Fitz-George,  quoted,  67 

Foreign  Office- 
China  loan,  96 
financiers,  99 

Foreign  trade,  79,  80 

Foxwell,  Professor  H.  S.,  119 

Free  Trade,  74 

Gild  Socialism,  182 

Gill,  Mr.  Conrad,  quoted,  75 

Goethe,  114 

Grey,  Sir  E.,  98 

Habeas  Corpus,  14 
Harvey  Steel  Company,  49 
Hobbes,  116 

Hobhouse,  Mr.  L.  T.,  117 
Holy  Alliance,  208 
House  of  Commons,  107-9 
Hypocrisy,  charge  of,  137-8 

Imperialism,  Ch.  IV 

in  South  Africa,  87 
Improperly,  21 

defence  of,  Ch.  Ill 
Income,  pre-war,  173 
Industrial  System,  the,  32  n. 
Interestocracy,  102 
Internationalism,     working-class, 

205 
Interpostal  Union,  87 
Investment — 

and  export  trade,  82 

foreign,  81 

influence  of,  80-101 

Jones,  Sir  Henry,  118 

Journalism,  127-31 

Justice  in  Law  Courts,  184-5 

Kant,  114 


Kilometritis,  36 
Kultur,  41 

Labour  leaders,  147 
Law — 

and  improperty,  54 

power  of,  184 
Lawyer  as  politician,  105-7 
League  of  Nations,  147,  193 

need  of,  207-8 

structure  of,  206-9 
Levee  en  masse,  13 
Leviathan,  115 
Lippman,  Mr.  Walter,  91 
Lloyd  George,  Mr.,  no,  169 
Lords,  veto  of,  64 

Mannesman,  92 
Marxism,  162 

Maxwell,  Lieut. -General,  67 
Mercantilism,  74 
Militarism — 

British,  42,  62 

definition  of,  19 

economic  factors  in,  104 

French,  42,  Ci 

German,  44,  50 

rise  of  modern,  27 

war  in  relation  to,  16 
Military  Service  Acts,  14,  66 
Milner,  Lord,  84 
Monarchy,  60 
Monroe  Doctrine,  90 
Montesquieu,  quoted,  27 
Morley,  Lord,  quoted,  127 
Morocco,  91-2 

National  economy,  77 

Newbold,    Mr.    Walton,    quoted, 

49,  50 
Nobel  Trust,  50 
Northcliffe,  Lord,  193 


INDEX 


21 


n  Open  Door  "  policy,  93,  100 

Persia,  92 

Politics,  factors  in,  104-5 

Power — 

exercise  of,  23 

nations  as,  20 

will  to,  7,  21,  22 
Press — 

influences  in,  127-31 

proletarian,  130 
Productivity — 

high,  169 

need  of,  174 

State  policy,  177 

workers  and,  171-6 
Profiteering,  31 

by  cartels,  199 

economy  of,  121 
Property — 

as  power,  29 

conservative  view  of,  63 

defence  of,  62 
Protectionism,  Ch.  IV — 

relations  to  other  isms,  150-2 

revival  of,  109 
Prussia,  power  of,  57 
Prussian-Australianism,  169,  193 
Prussianism,  113 

Public-house,  atmosphere  of,  136 
Public  Schools,  126 

Railways,  nationalization  of,  160 
Reaction,  Alliance  of,  134 
Reichstag,  composition  of,  40 
Revolution,  industrial,  27 
Rhodes,  85 
Rhondda,  Lord, 198 
Rousseau,  116 
Russell,  the  Hon.  Bertrand,  142 


Printed  in 
UNWIN   HKOTHEKS,    LIMITED,  THE 


Russia,  58 
revolution  in,  59 

Salisbury,  Lord,  quoted,  132 
Schmoller,  quoted,  75 
Servia,  38 
Socialism,  119-49 

Christian,  125 

defects  of,  139,  154-5 

State,  164-81 

v.  Capitalism,  32 
South  Africa — 

Press  in,  86 

war  in,  85-6 
Spheres  of  influence,  100 
State,  a  closed,  Part  II,  Ch.  V 
Stephen,  Sir  James,  101 
Surplus,  economic,  30 
Syndicalism,  181 

Tarde,  Alfred  de,  quoted,  196 
Taxation,  policy  of,  168 
Thomas,  Mr.  J.  H.,  quoted,  66 
Trade  Boards,  178 
7  raffle  in  Treason,  65 

United  States,  Press  of  the,  129 

Veblen,  Imperialism  ami  Modem 

Germany,  56 
Vicious  circles,  145,  etc. 
how  broken,  156 

Wealth— 

as  instrument  of  power,  25 

distribution  of,  173-4 
Withers,  Mr.  Hartley,  quoted,  90 
Woman,  changed  status  of,  160, 

183-4 
Work  and  Wealth,  32  n. 

Great  Britain  by 
GRESIIAM   PRESS,   WOKING   AND  LONDON 


Towards  Industrial  Freedom 

By  EDWARD   CARPENTER 

Crown  $vo.  Paper,  zs.  6d.  net.     Cloth,  3/.  6d.  net. 

This  new  work  by  Mr.  Edward  Carpenter,  consisting  of  a  series 
of  papers  on  the  subject  of  the  new  organizations  and  new  principles 
which  will,  it  is  hoped,  be  established  in  the  world  of  Industry  after  the 
war,  will  be  eagerly  welcomed  by  all  thoughtful  people. 

Economic  Conditions  1815&1914 

Crown  $z>o.     By  H.  R.   HODGES,  B.Sc.  (Econ.)     U.  6d.  net. 

II  An  interesting  record  of  real  advance  in  social  organization." — The 
Challenge. 

"A  highly  instructive  and  interesting  comparison." — Observer. 

The  Present  Position  and 
Power  of  the  Press 

By    HILAIRE    BELLOC 

Crown  $vo.  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

The  purpose  of  this  essay  is  to  discuss  the  evils  of  the  great  modern 
Capitalist  Press,  its  function  in  vitiating  and  misinforming  opinion,  and 
in  putting  power  into  ignoble  hands  ;  its  correction  by  the  formation  of 
small  independent  organs,  and  their  probably  increasing  effect. 

The  Future  of  Constantinople 

By   LEONARD   S.   WOOLF 

Crown  $vo.  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  \d. 

"  A  very  thorough  piece  of  work  and  is  one  of  the  essential  books." — 
Leicester  Pioneer. 
"An  admirable  little  book."— Common  Sense. 

National  Defence  S£3£ 

By  J.   RAMSAY   MACDONALD,   M.P. 
Crown  %vo.  Third  Impression,      zs.  6d.  net.    Postage  \.d. 

II I  am  convinced  that  Mr.  Macdonald's  is  the  wisest,  the  most  states- 
manlike, and  the  most  important  of  the  books  written  on  the  possibilities 
of  future  and  permanent  peace." — Gerald  Gough  in  The  Herald. 


Home  Truths  about  the  War 

By  the  Rev.  HUGH  B.  CHAPMAN,  Chaplain  of  the  Savoy 
Crown  Svo.  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  \d. 

"A  manifesto  of  the  newly  energized  Christianity  that  is  the  new  help 
and  hope  of  shaken,  baffled,  numbed  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Everyone." — Daily 
Mail. 


The    United    States   and    the 

X\T„~        By  gilbert 

War       VIVIAN   SELDES 

Crown  8vo.  zs.  6 J.  net.     Tostage  \d. 

"A  brilliant  and  successful  attempt  to  explain  why  it  took  America 
two  years  and  eight  months  to  discover  that  the  German  Government 
was  her  enemy." — The  Athctuviim. 


The  American    League   to 
Enforce   Peace    by  c.  r.  ashbee 

With  an  Introduction  by  G.   LOWES   DICKINSON 

Crown  Svo.  zk  6 J.  net.     Tostage  $d. 

11  Provides    much    information    concerning    contemporary    American 
thought." — Alhenamm. 

The   Menace   of  Peace 

By  GEORGE  D.  HERRON 

Crown  Svo.  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  \d% 

"  He  says  some  magnificent  things  magnificently." — New  Witness.  ' 


Uniform  with  the  foregoing 
Towards  a  Lasting  Settlement 

By  G.  LOWES  DICKINSON,  H.  N.  BRAILSFORD,  J.  A.  HOB- 
SON,  VERNON  LEE,  PHILIP  SNOWDEN,  M.P.,  A.  MAUD 
ROYDEN,  H.  SIDEBOTHAM,  and  others.  Edited  by  CHARLES 
RODEN  BUXTON. 

Second  Impression.        Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  5^. 

"  The  essays  are  contributions  of  real  help  towards  the  solution  of  great 
and  inevitable  problems." — Prof.  Gilbert  Murray  in  The  Nation. 

Towards  International  Government  Byj.A.HOBsoN. 

Third  Impression.  Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"Always  lucid,  cogent,  and  unflinching  in  his  argument,  and  .  .  . 
leads  us  step  by  step  towards  the  conclusion  that  .  .  .  the  boldest 
solution  is  safest  and  simplest." — Manchester  Guardian. 

The  Future  of  Democracy         By  h.  m.  hyndman. 

Crown  8vo,  2s.  6d.  net.    Postage  $d. 

"  Well  worth  reading." — Manchester  Courier. 

"Written  with  all  his  old  force  and  lucidity." — Yorkshire  Post. 

The  Healing  of  Nations     By  edward  carpenter. 

5th  Edition.    Cr.  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.    Paper,  2s.  net.    Postage  $d. 

"  Profoundly  interesting.  Well  worth  most  careful  attention."— Observer. 
"A  wise  and  understanding  book." — T.  P.'s  Weekly. 

N 

Above  the  Battle 

By  ROMAIN  ROLLAND.  Translated  by  C.  K.  OGDEN,  M.A. 
Third  Impression.  Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  25.  6d.  net.    Postage  4^. 

■  We  must  leave  unnoticed  many  fine  and  penetrating  thoughts  and 
many  stirring  passages  in  these  golden  pages.  In  them,  let  us  say,  once 
for  all,  speaks  the  finest  spirit  of  modern  France." — The  Times  Literary 
Supplement. 

The  War  and  the  Balkans 

By  NOEL  BUXTON,  M.P.,  and  CHARLES  RODEN  BUXTON. 
3rd  Edition.    Cr.  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.    Paper  is.  net.     Postage,  \d. 

"  Far  and  away  the  best  statement  that  has  yet  appeared  of  the  attitude 
of  the  Balkan  States." — Sir  Edwin  Pears  in  the  Daily  Chronicle. 


Uniform  <with  the  foregoing 
The  European   Anarchy 

By  G.   LOWES  DICKINSON,  Author  of  "A  Modem  Symposium," 
etc.,  etc.    Third  Impression.    Cr.  8vo,  Cloth,  35.  6d.  net.    Postage  qd. 
"This  is  one  of  the  shrewdest  books  on  the  causes  of  the  war  that  we 
have  read." — The  Economist. 

The   Deeper  Causes  of  the   War 

By    EMILE    HOVELAQUE.       With    an    Introduction    by    Sir 
WALTER  RALEIGH. 

Second  Impression.        Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 
"  This  is  one  of  the  most  thoughtful  and  suggestive  books  that  the  great 
war  has  inspired." — Aberdeen  Journal. 

War  and  Civilization     By  the  rt.  Hon.  j.  m.  Robertson, 

M.P.    Second  Edition.    Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  \d. 
"A    spirited    piece    of    international    polemic.     It    is    always    acute, 
moderate  and  well  informed." — Manchester  Guardian. 

Our  Ultimate  Aim  in  the  War       By  george  g. 

ARMSTRONG.  Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2S.  6d.  net.     Postage  5d. 

"  Strikes  a  note  to  which  the  best  of  his  countrymen  will  respond." — 
Times. 

The  Coming  Scrap  of  Paper  By  edward  w. 

EDSALL.  Crown  8vo,  Cloth,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"  One  of  the  most  interesting  and  illuminative  of  recent   financial 
essays,  set  forth  with  skill  and  lucidity." — Financial  News. 

The  True  Cause  of  the  Commercial  Difficulties 
of  Great  Britain  By  cecil  balfour  phipson. 

Edited  by  MARK  B.   F.   MAJOR  and   EDWARD   W.  EDSALL. 

Crown  8vo,  2s.  6d.  net.     Postage  3d. 
"The  argument  is  clearly  and  lucidly  stated." — Guardian. 

Perpetual  Peace     By  immanuel  kant. 

Cheap  Edition.  Crown  8vo,  2s.  net.     Postage  4^. 

"  ■  Perpetual  Peace '  may  some  day  be  looked  upon  as  the  foundation 
of  a  new  social  system." — T.  P.'s  Weekly. 

The  Polish   Review 

Edited   by  J.   H.   HARLEY 

Roy al  St'o.       Quarterly  2/.  net.       8/.  per  annum  post  free. 
A   journal  dealing   with  current  events  in  Poland  and  amongst  the 
Poles.    The  articles  are  from  the  pen  of  eminent  writers  and  authorities, 
and  embrace  every  branch  of  Polish  life  and  history. 


The  Conscience  of  Europe- 
The  War  and  the   Future 

By    Prof.    ALEXANDER    W.    RIMINGTON 

Crown  $vo.  3/.  6d.  net. 

Deals  with  some  of  the  great  questions  raised  by  the  war  from  ethical 
and  religious  standpoints.  Endeavours  to  show  the  necessity  for  con- 
sidering them  if  there  is  to  be  hope  for  the  future  peace  and  civilization 
of  Europe.  Analyses  some  of  the  causes  of  the  decay  of  the 
international  conscience,  and  discusses  means  for  its  reinvigoration. 

"A  remarkable  and  deeply  interesting  book,  showing  courage  and 
independence  of  thought  combined  with  keen  human  sympathies,  and 
which  should  make  a  wide  appeal." — M.  J.  E. 

A  Bulwark  against  Germany 

The  Fight  of  the  Slovenes,  the  Western  Branch 

of  the  Jugoslavs,  for  National  Existence 

By  BOGUMIL   VOSNJAK 

Late  Lecturer  of  the  University  of  Zagreb  (Croatia). 

Translated  by  FANNY  S.  COPELAND 
Crown  8vo.  \s.  6d,  net.     Postage  ^d. 

u  Not  only  a  piece  of  powerful  propaganda,  but  a  literary  production 
of  high  quality.  Full  of  illumination  on  Near  Eastern  questions." — 
Pall  Mall  Gazette. 

A   Dying  Empire 

By   BOGUMIL   VOSNJAK 
With  a  Preface  by  T.  P.  O'CONNOR,  M.P. 

Crown  8vo.  4/.  6d.  net.     Tostage  $d. 

Poland   Past  and  Present 

Crown  8vo.  By  J.   H.   HARLEY  is.6d.net.  Postage  $d. 

"  We  can  recommend  the  history  of  this  wonderful  people  .  .  .  setting 
out  clearly  the  chief  points  of  a  romantic  story." — Morning  Post, 

Bohemia's 
Case  for    Independence 

By   EDWARD   BENES,   D.Litt. 

Lecturer  at  Prague  University,  etc.,  etc. 

With   an   Introduction  by  HENRY  WICKHAM  STEED 

Foreign  Editor  of  The  Times. 

Crown  8vo.  zs%  6d.  net. 


After  -  War    Problems 

By  the    late   EARL    OF   CROMER,   VISCOUNT 

HALDANE,     The      BISHOP     OF     EXETER, 

Prof.  ALFRED  MARSHALL,  and  Others 

Edited  by  William  Harbutt   Dawson 

Demy  8w.  Second  Impression,     js.  6d.  net.     Postage  6d. 

"Valuable,  clear,  sober,  and  judicial." — The  Times. 
"Will  be  very  helpful  to  thoughful  persons."— Morning  Post. 
"  A  book  of  real  national  importance,  and  of  which  the  value  may  very 
well  prove  to  be  incalculable." — Daily  'Telegraph. 

The  Choice  Before  Us 

By  G.   LOWES    DICKINSON 

Demy  $vo.  Second  Impression.       6s.  net.     Postage  f>d. 

"There  are  many  pages  in  this  volume  which  express  admirably  the 
opinions  of  calm,  clear-thinking  men." — The  Times. 

"  A  noble  book  which  everyone  should  read." — Daily  News. 

The    Parliamentary    History    of 
Conscription    in    Great    Britain 

Demy  %vo.  $s.  net.     Postage  $d. 

A    Summary  of  the  Parliamentary    Debates,  etc.,  with  an    Index 
and  Text  of  the  Military  Service  Acts    and  a 

Preface    by    RICHARD    C.    LAMBERT,    M.P. 

41  An  extremely  useful  volume." — Glasgow  Herald. 

Practical     Pacifism     and     its 

Adversaries  I    "Is  it  Peace,  Jehu  ?" 

By   Dr.   SEVERIN    NORDENTOET 

>   With  an  Introduction  by  G.  K.  CHESTERTON 

Crown  %vo.  4*.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

u  A  striking  indictmeut  of  German  rule  by  representatives  of  oppressed 
peoples," — The  Times. 


Authority,  Liberty  and  Function 
in  the  Light  of  the  War 

By   RAMIRO   DE   MAEZTU 

Crown  %vo.  4/.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"  One  of  the  most  stimulating  and  interesting  essays  in  political  science 
that  the  war  has  produced. '' — Land  and  Water. 

The  Framework  of  a  Lasting 

Vf>ant*  Edited  by 

iCd^C         LEONARD  S.    WOOLF 
Demy  8vo.  4/.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

This  work  contains  a  collection  of  all  the  more  important  schemes 
which  have  been  put  forward  in  America,  Britain,  and  on  the  Continent 
for  a  League  of  Nations  which  shall  have  as  its  object  the  reconstruction 
of  international  society  and  the  prevention  of  war.  Mr.  Woolf,  in  an 
Introduction,  subjects  the  different  proposals  to  a  critical  examination, 
and  shows  that  upon  the  most  important  points  they  are  in  substantial 
agreement,  and  thus  indicate  the  lines  of  international  agreement  which 
practical  statesmanship  ought  to  follow  after  the  war. 

Oxford  Essays  in  Feminism 

Crown  8w.    Edited  by  VICTOR  GOLLANCZ    +/.  6d.  vet. 

The  contributors  to  this  collection  of  essays  share  a  conviction  that 
the  question  of  the  position  of  women  in  the  State  is  a  question  of 
immediate  interest  to,  both  sexes  alike.  Starting  from  the  assumption 
that  in  the  near  future  the  main  part  of  the  efforts  of  Feminists  will  be 
released  from  the  struggle  for  the  vote,  this  book  discusses  the  purposes 
to  which  this  energy  may  be  devoted.  No  attempt  is  made  to  form  an 
absolutely  definite  programme  ;  rather,  difficult  questions  are  squarely 
faced,  and  where  there  is  room  for  difference  of  opinion,  as  for  instance 
in  the  question  of  "  equal  pay  for  equal  work,"  the  case  is  put  -from  both 
sides.  Amongst  the  contributors  are  "The  Round  Table,"  Maud  Royden, 
Eleanor  Rathbone,  Elinor  Burns,  Douglas  F.  Jerrold,  R.  B.  Rooper,  and 
V.  Gollancz. 

Old  Worlds  for  New 

Crown  8*.   i        By  ARTHUR  J.  PENTY  3s.  6 J.  net. 

In  this  work  the  author  analyses  the  structure  of  Industrialism,  showing 
how  its  quantitative  ideal  defeats  alike  efforts  to  improve  the  lot  of  the 
worker  and  to  revive  the  crafts  and  arts.  The  war  he  considers  to  be 
the  logical  outcome  of  the  economic  rivalries  consequent  upon  such  a 
false  standard  of  production.  He  concludes  that  the  path  of  salvation 
is  to  be  found  immediately  in  a  revival  of  the  principles  antipathetic  to 
Industrialism,  which  underlie  social  organization  in  the  past,  and  ulti- 
mately in  a  restoration  of  the  Mediaeval  Guild  System. 


The   Camp   School 

By    MARGARET    McMILLAN,   C.B.E. 

Crown  $vo.  3/.  6d.  net.      Postage  \d. 

Tliis  book,  written  in  a  more  or  less  informal  way,  is  inscribed  to  the 
elementary  school  teachers  of  Bradfoid,  with  whom  some  of  the 
author's  and  her  sister's  happiest  hours  were  spent.  It  sets  forth  the 
record  of  a  series  of  experiments  which  had  as  their  object  the  removal 
of  the  disabilities  that  come  to  the  children  of  poverty  and  make  even 
the  best  teaching  difficult,  or  even  impossible.  It  is  hoped  that  in 
this  hour  of  stress  the  book  may  be  found  useful  to  those  who  are 
planning  a  new  order  of  future  for  the  children  of  the  Empire. 

Physical    Education    in 
Relation    to    School    Life 

A    Statement  of  Present  Conditions  and   Future  Needs 

For   Parents,   Teachers,   Members   of  Education  and  School  Care 

Committees,  and  all  interested  in  National  Health 

By  REGINALD  E.  ROPER,  M.A.,  M.Ed. 
Crown  Sz>o.  zs.  6d.  net.      Postage  $d. 

"A  piece  of  honest  thinking  and  commonsense  applied  with  a  vigour 
that  is  occasionally  almost  relentless." — The  Times. 

"A  reasoned  statement  of  the  whole  position,  strongly  recommended 
to  head  teachers  who  are  not  specialists  in  this  matter, and  no  less  strongly 
to  those  who  are  expcits  in  physical  training." — Educational  Times. 

The  Adolescent 

By   J.    W.   SLAUGHTER 

With    an   Introduction  by  J.  J.   FINDLAY 

Crown  8vo.  Second   Impression.      2s.  6d.  net.     Tost  age  ^d. 

A  small    but   valuable   manual   of    Eugenics,   a   science   still    in   its 
infancy." —  Westminster  Rcviciv. 

Newsholme's  School  Hygiene 

The  Laws  of  Health  in  Relation  to  School  Life 

By   JAMES   KERR,   M.A.,   M.D. 

Fourteenth   Edition — Revised  and   Re-written 

Large  Crown  Sz>o.  4/.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"  We  have  seen  no  better  book  for  the  purpose." — Pall  Mall  Gazette. 


Battles    and   Bivouacs 

A  French  Soldier's  Note-book 
By  JACQUES  ROUJON 

Translated  by  FRED    ROTHWELL 

Large  Crown  $vo.  51.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"A  perfectly  delightful  book  ;  full  of  gaiety  and  good  temper.  It  is  as 
interesting  as  the  'Three  Musketeers.'  " — Church  Times. 

The  Diary  of  a  French  Private 

1914— 1915 

By   GASTON   RIOU 

Translated  by  E.  and  C.  PAUL 

Crown  $vo,  Cloth.  $s.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"  M.  Rion  is  rather  more  than  a  simple  soldier.  He  is  a  writer  of  great 
gifts — narrative  power,  humour,  tenderness,  and  philosophical  insight. 
Moreover,  his  exceptional  knowledge  of  Germany  gives  special  value  to 
his  account  of  his  experiences  as  a  prisoner  of  war." — Literary  Supplement 
of  The  Times. 

My  Experiences  on  Three 

r  rOntS   SISTER   MARTIN-NICHOLSON 

Crown  Svo.  4/.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"She  has  written  simply  and  vividly  one  of  the  best  war  nursing 
books." — Nursing  Times. 

The  Path  to   Rome :       i 

A  Description  of  a  Walk  from  Lorraine 

With  80  Illustrations  by  the  Author 

By  HILAIRE   BELLOC 

Popular  Edition.  Crown  Svot  3/.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

"  Quite  the  most  sumptuous  embodiment  of  universal  gaiety  and  erratic 
wisdom  that  has  been  written." — The  Wot  Id. 

Nights  in  Town 

A   London  Autobiography    By  THOMAS  BURKE 

Crown  $vo.  Popular  Edition         is.  net.     Postage  \d, 

"A  very  wonderful  and  weird  hook." — Daily  Sketch. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below, 
or  on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  Renewals  only: 

Tel.  No.  642-3405 
Renewals  may  be  made  4  days  priod  to  date  due. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to_  immediate  recall. 

Due  end  ofMPRlNG  Quarter 


subject  to  recall 


■ 


^^-rr 


SBTQLH   MN    97: 


2 

YAP,' 


it 


r 


♦      9 

LD  21-:- 


■IQAM7 


APR    7197539 


* 


REC.  CIR.     APR    V; 


^N  3     1985 


£$  ■*  ^s- 


1/ -£"-*£" 


RF^Flfrfe^RY 


M/iv  a  i    ,f. 


CIRCULATION  DEPT, 

DEC  1  4  2003 


LD21A-60m-8,'70 
(N8837sl0)476— A-32 


C 
Univeu 


,V"« 


•UAH 


4  1  RCO 
£8    4 


-2  19£9 
4#$ 


V> 


/ 


GENERAL  LIBRARY  -  U.C.  BERKELEY 

1 


BQ00730738 


\  . 

* 

-   / 

'   . 

MioasTs 

''V  N 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

*# 


